Election Petition: Supreme Court Dismisses Mahama’s Motion, Again

The Supreme Court of Ghana has by unanimous decision dismissed an application by the lawyers of former president John Dramani Mahama to inspect the documents of the 1st respondent, the chairperson of the Electoral Commission.

The petitioner, John Dramani Mahama, filed a motion seeking to inspect documents from the Electoral Commission (EC). The motion was moved during Tuesday’s hearing.

But on Wednesday, the ninth day of the Election Petition hearing, the court dismissed the application.

While You’re Here:

• Election Petition: You’re Harassing my Witness – Tsatsu Tells Justice of Supreme Court
• FDA Approves First Herbal Medicine for Clinical Trial on COVID-19 Treatment

Mr. Mahama also requested the records of “the alleged update to the purported declaration of presidential election results on 9th December 2020.”

According to the the lead counsel for the petitioner, Tsatsu Tsikata, Mr. Mahama wants the following in the application:

1. The originals of the Constituency Presidential Election Results Collation Forms (Form 9) for all constituencies in Ghana;
2. The originals of the Constituency Presidential Election Results Summary Sheets (Form 10) for all constituencies in Ghana;
3. The originals of the Regional Presidential Election Results Collation Forms (Form 11) for all regions in Ghana;
4. The originals of the Regional Presidential Election Results Summary Sheets (Form 12) for all regions in Ghana;
5. The original of the Declaration of the Presidential Results Form (Form 13);
6. The records of the alleged update to the purported declaration of presidential election results on 9th December 2020, of the results of four Constituencies in the Greater Accra Region.

However, by a unanimous decision of the panel, the memnbers stated that the applicant has not been able to demonstrate that he does not have duplicate copies of those documents.

The 7-member panel chaired by Chief Justice Anin Yeboah in dismissing the application indicated that the applicant was unable to raise issues regarding the authenticity of the documents in their possession.