Lead Counsel for the 2020 general election petitioner, Tsatsu Tsikata has insisted that a video recording of happenings in the Electoral Commission’s strong room during the collation of the election, must be played in the court to support the statement of Mr. Robert Joseph Mettle-Nunoo.
Mr. Rojo Mettle-Nunoo is the third witness of the petitioner. Tsatsu Tsikata was objecting to a plead by lead counsel Akoto Ampaw for the 2nd Respondent (President Nana Akuffo Addo) who wants the court to strike out paragraph 5 (five) of the witness statement.
Mr. Ampaw for that part to be dismissed on grounds that it was not borne out of pleadings.
Mr Mettle-Nunoo’s statement said that “the EC had a video documentary person recording the events in the strong room and I have no doubt that if that documentary is made available in its authentic version it will confirm what I am saying in this witness statement about things that occurred in the strong room.”
However, Mr Tsiktata told the court that “Second witness said there was somebody taking video commentaries. That evidence was not objected to, that evidence is before you and we are respectfully submitting that what is stated in Paragraph 5 is no different from what is already before you about the video documentary. All that this witness is adding, is that he is willing to put his credibility on the line so that if anybody wants to have recourse to the video they are entitled to “.
Tsikata added, “depending on the cross-examination we may indeed come before you with an application that that video should be produced in court and played.”
Mr. Robert Joseph Mettle-Nunoo, said in his witness statement that “my colleague, Dr Michael Kpessa-Whyte, and I on many occasions pointed out errors in the figures and words on the sheets that were brought in which ultimately affected totals and assigned results. This sometimes led to EC officials making phone calls on the basis of which they sought to explain and correct some of the things we pointed out.
“I cannot tell to whom those phone calls were made. I cannot tell if the calls were to EC officials to some other people who were also involved in the collation process. There was no transparent process in this regard”.
Mr. Robert Joseph Mettle-Nunoo, said in his witness statement that the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission (EC), Mrs. Jean Mensa told him that, all the concerns that he raised in the strong room against the collation of the presidential results were genuine and she would have them looked into.
“Mrs. Jean Mensa informed me that there had been a meeting held earlier in the day between the Petitioner and the Peace Council, something I was unaware of at the time.
After I further drew her attention to some of the issues that were coming up in the interactions in the strong room, she said very directly that we should go and speak with the Petitioner. Having regard to her earlier reference to the meeting between the Peace Council and the Petitioner, which she had obviously been briefed about, I took seriously what she said”.
“I do not think we, who were acting as agents of the Petitioner, should be seen as taking positions which many be contrary to what the Petitioner himself and had conveyed in a meeting that I was unaware of with a body such as the Peace Council which, I know has an important role in resolving disputes in connection with elections and calming tensions in the country. She indicated her own willingness to meet with the Petitioner.”
With regards to whether or not the 1st Respondent, Jean Mensa asked them to meet John Mahama, he said “Yet my colleague and I realized with a shock, on our reaching the residence of the Petitioner that the EC Chairperson was in the process of announcing results. Attempts I made to reach the Chairperson of the EC by telephone for clarification proved futile as she had turned off her phones.”
However, the said video in question will resolve the issue of whether Jean Mensa did ask them to meet the petitioner or not?
Filed By : Agaatorne Douglas Asaah / awakenewsroom.com
That would be interesting
