<<Print>>

The Supreme Court will on Thursday determine whether or not the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission (EC), Mrs Jean Adukwei Mensa, must mount the witness box to be cross -examined in the 2020 election petition.

The court will make that determination following over three hours of legal arguments by various counsels to make their respective cases on the issue today.

EC’s case

Counsel for the EC, Mrs Justine Amenuvor, argued that the rules of court specifically Order 38 (4) (4) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, CI47 allowed the EC, which is the first respondent in the petition, not to adduced evidence.

He argued that the decision not to testify is at the behest of parties, and that court has no business on whether or not a party will call witnesses to adduce evidence.

According to him, if the petitioner, Former President John Dramani Mahama, has a good case, he should excited that the respondents have decided not to give evidence.

Counsel of Nana Akufo-Addo (2nd respondent), Mr Akoto Ampaw, associated himself with the submissions of counsel for the EC.

He argued that the petitioner should be happy at the decision by the respondents not to call witnesses.

Tsatsu Tsikata

Counsel for Former President Mahama, Mr Tsatsu Tsikata, argued that it was in the interest of justice for the EC Chairperson to be cross-examined.

According to him, Mrs Mensa was the person responsible for the declaration of presidential results and that she had a responsible to account to the people of Ghana.

Also, it was his submission that Mrs Mensa must be in the witness box because she had filed a witness statement and also made certain assertions in her affidavits which presupposes that she was “offering herself to be cross -examined.”

He further argued that counsel for the EC opposed the petitioner’s application for interrogatories with the explanation that those interrogatories could be asked during cross-examination.

In view of that he argued the EC chairperson had willing agreed to be cross -examined.