Tsatsu taunts Addison over ‘pdf edit-proof’ claim

Lead Counsel for the governing National Democratic Congress in the election petition hearing, Mr. Tsatsu Tsikata, on Wednesday took a veiled swipe at Lead Counsel of the petitioners, Mr. Philip Addison, over the latter's claim that pdf files cannot be edited nor altered.

The subtle taunt came about during arguments by the three lead lawyers for the respondents, to convince the Bench to stop Mr. Addison from using an electoral record sheet (pink sheet) whose authenticity the respondents doubted.

The three lawyers questioned the absence of the Commissioner of Oath’s stamp on the controversial pink sheet, about which Mr. Addison sought to cross-examine Electoral Commission Chairman, Dr. Kwadwo Afari-Gyan, during the hearing.

In supporting the objection first raised by the president’s Lead Counsel, Tony Lithur, which was subsequently endorsed by the Lead Counsel for the EC James Quashie-Idun, Mr. Tsikata said: “…My Lord, that is the fact of the matter; I mean some people do not even know that pdf documents can be transferred into word, but it is a fact as far as technology is concerned that you can generate documents from a computer and change certain aspects of it”.

An obviously irked Mr. Addison responded to Mr. Tsikata's veiled insinuations which he described as "...long lectures and insults" which "are totally unnecessary".

He also took exception to the impression created by the respondents that the petitioners were attempting to "manufacture pink sheets on the last day" of the hearing.

Mr. Addison stated categorically in open Court on Monday July 15, 2013 during his cross-examination of Dr. Afari-Gyan that, pdf files were edit-proof.

The issue cropped up following persistent attempts by Mr. Philip Addison to seek confirmation and clarification from Dr. Afari-Gyan, about a copy of the EC’s voters’ register used for the 2012 elections.

Dr. Afari-Gyan pointed out minor anomalies regarding the arrangement of names on the register despite conceding that there was not much substantial difference between the original register of the EC and the copy he was being confronted with.

Mr. Addison, however, insisted the copy he was confronting Dr. Afari-Gyan with was a replica of the EC’s original copy, and therefore, wondered if the EC gave the opposition New Patriotic Party a different pdf copy from what the other parties were given.

Dr. Afari-Gyan kept saying the EC gave all the parties the same copy of the original register, and therefore, said he was baffled by the discrepancy he had noticed.

The petitioners’ lead Counsel, however, insisted pdf documents could not be altered and so wondered why Dr. Afari-Gyan was raising issues with the document he was being confronted with.

A female Justice then sought to know from Dr. Afari-Gyan if he knew what pdf was.

He answered in the negative.