Election Petition: Why is Mahama not in the witness box? – Oppong-Nkrumah queries

Zion February 9, 2021
Updated 2021/02/09 at 7:23 AM

Kojo Oppong-Nkrumah, one of the spokespersons for the 2nd Respondent in the ongoing Election Petition at the Supreme Court has created controversy by asking why John Mahama is not in the witness box.


After the hearing on Monday, 8 February, the media queried why Jean Mensa was “running away” from the expected interrogation but Oppong Nkrumah retorted:

“…isn’t it interesting that Mr Mahama himself, the Petitioner, did not mount the witness box and we are not arguing about why he is not in the witness box? Why has he not taken the witness box? Can anybody force him to take the witness box?”

Can anybody force Mr Mahama to take the witness box? Can anybody force the other two witnesses of the NDC that by force they should get into the box?

So, if you are asking about the announcement that we will not be putting anybody in the box, it is because our lawyers are of the view that, that basic threshold [of the petitioner presenting a winnable case] has not been met,” Oppong-Nkrumah explained to the media.

Counsels for the 1st Respondent and 2nd Respondent told the Supreme Court on Monday, February 8, 2021, that they do not intend to open their defence or call witnesses.

The Counsels argued that evidence presented by the witnesses for the petitioner and from cross-examination does not support the reliefs being requested by Mr Mahama in the petition filed.

Citing Order 36 Rule 43 and C. I 87 rule 3 (e) 5, lead counsel for the EC, Justin Amenuvor told the 7-member panel of judges that the EC was satisfied with proceedings so far and asked the court to make a determination on the petition before it.

But Tsatsu Tsikata disagreed.

He alleged that the move by the 1st and 2nd Respondents is a deliberate attempt by the EC Chairperson, Jean Mensa, to avoid cross-examination which will expose the illegalities that characterised the December 7 elections.

Lawyer Tsatsu Tsikata explained further that the request by the counsel for the Respondent was not in line with Order 36 Rule 43 and CI 87 rule 3 (e) 5 as stated.

But the judges sided with the respondents, adding that the witnesses cannot be compelled to testify.

The Supreme Court will resume hearing today for the parties to argue on the matter.

Source: www.ghanaweb.com

Watch below Kojo Oppong-Nkrumah speaking to the press.

Share this Article