On Friday, John Asiedu Nketiah, the first witness for the petitioner in the 2020 Presidential Election Petition, raised a concern in the Supreme Court that counsel for the 1st Respondent Electoral Commission of Ghana (EC) addressed him as though he were the petitioner.
Asiedu Nketiah, who is the General Secretary of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), took his turn in the witness box at the Supreme Court as the first witness of the petitioner to be crossed examined.
While counsel for the EC was “putting it to” masked Mr. Nketiah in the witness box who provided answers where required, it got to a point where he got seemingly alarmed by the line of questioning.
Lawyer Justin Amenuvor, the counsel for the EC, had made reference to some analysis the petitioner did on the Techiman South results and arrived at a conclusion that the EC Chair was wrong with her figures when she declared Akufo-Addo President on December 9, 2020.
The lawyer pointed out to Mr. Aseidu that the analysis was not accurate.
He said “I’m putting it to you that using all the total valid votes in the Techiman South constituency, that’s the total registered voters (sic) in the Techiman South Constituency to do your analysis is incorrect and I’m putting that to you.”
Aseidu Nketia disagreed, explaining that their analysis on that issue was informed by what the 1st Respondent Electoral Commission chairperson, Jean Mensa had said on December 9, 2020, when she declared the Presidential Election Results in favour of the 2nd Respondent Akufo-Addo
“So the analysis we did there was to show that based on the figures she herself declared, that statement could not be correct,” he explained.
Counsel insisted the witness knew that the Chairperson of the EC was right in her analysis as at the time she was declaring the said results and that it was stated in the petition and same confirmed by the 1st Respondent.
Mr. Nketiah wanted to clarify if the EC lawyer was referring to him as the one who he knew the EC chair was right. The lawyer answered in the affirmative, adding “so the petitioner stated that in the petition that that ought to be the correct number and the 1st Respondent agreed too”.
“I’m putting it to you that you knew”, Lawyer Justin stood his grounds demanding an answer to that query.
Mr. Nketia was hesitant with the answer at this point. He felt the lawyer had mistaken him for the petitioner.
“My lord, I don’t understand why you seem to be confusing me with the petitioner, my Lord, I don’t understand,” he said while laughing.
The court was thrown into laughter.
That however did not stop the lawyer from demanding his answers.
