The Electoral Commission has indicated its disinterest to allow its chairperson to mount the witness box to testify in the ongoing 2020 Presidential Election Petition.
Addressing the Supreme Court on Monday, the commission’s lawyer said the evidence before the court is sufficient for it to reach a verdict without the EC leading any further evidence.
“My lords with respect, it is our submission that in view of the evidence led by the witnesses of the petitioner and our cross-examination so far, speaking for the 1st Respondent, I am of the view that there is sufficient evidence before the court for this petition to be determined.
“We do not wish to lead any further evidence and therefore we are praying that this matter proceeds under Order 36, Rule 43 and CI 87 Rule 3E5. We hereby on that basis close our case,” Mr Justin Amenuvor argued.
The EC’s lawyer made this call after Mr Robert Mettle-Nunoo finished his testimony before the court.
He is the third witness for Former President John Dramani Mahama who is contesting the outcome of the January 7, 2020, Presidential Elections results as declared by the Electoral Commission at the Supreme Court.
He contends that neither him nor President Akufo-Addo, who was declared the winner in that elections had enough votes to be announced the winner as stipulated by the constitution.
The president’s predecessor wants an annulment of that verdict and in its place, another round of election organised between himself and the president.
The Electoral Commission believes that the testimonies of Mr Mettle- Nunoo, one of two representatives of the petitioner in the EC’s National Collation Centre, the NDC General Secretary, Johnson Asiedu Nketia and a Senior Lecturer at the University of Ghana, Dr Micheal Kpessa-Whyte should constitute enough evidence for the Justices to reach a verdict.
The position of the EC surprised the Petitioner, who opposed it vehemently.
According to lawyer Tsatsu Tsikata, the EC missed the privilege it is now seeking to enjoy when it filed an answer and a witness statement to the petition .
The court deferred the matter to Tuesday for the parties in dispute to adequately address the court on the position of the EC.