Lead Counsel for the petitioner in the ongoing election petition hearing, Mr Tsatsu Tsikata on Thursday February 18, 2021 told the justices of the Supreme Court they were cutting his submissions short.
This was when one of the justices, Getrude Torkonor sought to ask Mr Tsikata questions when he was on his feet making his argument in the application for a review of the court’s earlier ruling that witnesses cannot be compelled to testify.
Mr Tsikata, whose body language suggested he was not too happy about the development, said “You can’t be satisfied when I have not completed my answer. I have not concluded my answer and his Lordships say you are satisfied with my answer. You are cutting me short. I am giving an answer that will address what underlies your question.”
Meanwhile the Supreme Court has dismissed the review application filed by lawyers of Mr John Dramani Mahama against an earlier ruling that witnesses cannot be compelled to testify.
Lawyers of the petitioner were seeking a review of the ruling to enable the chair of the 1st respondent Jean Mensa mount the witness box for cross examination.
The Chief Justice in the ruling said “We have also taken into consideration the applicants’ reliance on Article 19 Clause 13 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution. We are of the view that the applicant has failed to satisfy the court with new or important matter in reference to the constitutional provisions. In the result, the application fails and it is hereby dismissed.”
During proceedings in court on Thursday February Counsel for the 2nd respondent in the ongoing hearing of the election petition, Mr Akoto Ampaw asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the review application.
Mr Akoto Ampaw argued that Mr Mahama’s review application smacks of an emotional party seeking to re-argue case hence the application should be dismissed.
His argument comes after lead counsel for the petitioner Mr Tsatsu gave the court the reasons why they want the ruling to be reconsidered.
But Mr Ampaw said “We are opposed to the application for a review and we rely on our affidavit in opposition and statement of case filed on the 17th of February. My Lords it is our respectfully view that that this application does not appropriately invoke the special review jurisdiction of the court under Article 133 as well as Rule 54 of CI 16”.
“My Lords, we are submitting to this honourable court that this application is a classic case of an aggrieved party who has become emotional by the decision of the court who seeks to re-argue his case through the backdoor of an apparently review application, which it is not,” Mr Ampaw said.
Meanwhile the application of stay of proceedings filed by the 2020 presidential candidate of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), John Dramani Mahama, in the ongoing election petition case, has been struck out by the Supreme Court.
Mr. Mahama’s lawyers on Tuesday, February 16, 2021, filed the application aimed at freezing hearing of the substantive matter to allow for an application for review of the court’s earlier ruling on the respondents putting forth witnesses heard.
The apex court ruled that Chairperson of the Electoral Commission, Jean Mensa, could not be compelled to testify and be cross-examined as a witness.
Mr. Mahama through his lawyers filed for a review of the ruling which necessitated the application for stay of proceedings; a request thrown out.
The court in ruling on the matter said the determination of the review application renders the stay application moot.
The Chief Justice, Kwasi Anin-Yeboah in delivering the ruling said, “The court is of the opinion this application was filed pending the determination of the review application which has been determined. So we are of the opinion that this application is moot and proceeds to strike it out.”