The New Statesman

Ghana's Oldest Mainstream Newspaper

Who Actually Won 2012 Election? SUPREME COURT DECIDES SOON -As Addison ends cross-examination of Afari-Gyan


ndications are clear that the ongoing 2012 election petition hearing at the Supreme Court will soon be put behind the nation, as the cross-examination of the witness of the Electoral Commission, Kwadwo Afari-Gyan, by the lead counsel of the petitioners, Philip Addison ends today.

James Quashi-Idun, lead counsel for the EC, yesterday indicated he would not do any re-examination, which means what will be left after today will be the filing of addresses by the parties in the petition.
This will then be followed by the final verdict, expected to be delivered by the nine-member panel of justices within 15 days after the addresses have been filed.
The verdict will settle the issue of who actually won the December 2012 presidential election: whether it was the candidate of the New Patriotic Party, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, or the candidate of the National Democratic Congress, John Dramani Mahama.
EC Counsel prevents attempt to end cross-examination
An indication by Mr Addison to end his cross- examination of star witness for the Electoral Commission, KwadwoAfari-Gyan, was cut short yesterday by a last minute attempt by the lead counsel for the EC, James Quarshie-Idun, to tender into evidence, 17 fresh pink sheets, ostensibly meant to shoot down the petitioners’ claim of the existence of triplicate and quadruplicate pink sheets.
The attempt was fiercely objected to by Mr Addison, who explained to the court that the witness during his cross-examination was not ambiguous in his answers and had admitted to the court that there were triplication and duplication of pink sheets.
Mr Addison told the court he was at a loss as to why the EC would want to restart a case that was almost ending, and prayed the court to be given the chance to cross-examine the witness again on the new pink sheets.
When given time to examine the 17 new pink sheets, Mr Addison disclosed to the court that the petitioners now understood why the EC was reluctant to tender its own pink sheets, pointing to numerous errors in them.
The court assured the Mr Addison that he would be given the opportunity to cross-examine the witness again on the 17 newly introduced pink sheets, whilst directing the petitioners to go through them.
Violations, Omissions and Irregularities
When he had signalled his intention to end his cross-examination yesterday, Mr Addison suggested to the witness that out of the 10, 081 polling stations across the country, over-voting alone affected 742, 492 votes. John Mahama, the first respondent, had 502,013 whilst the first petitioner, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo had 225, 115 of the affected votes.
He further suggested to the witness that out of the 810, 827 people who voted without biometric verification, the first respondent had 558,236 whereas the first petitioner gained 234,161.
Unruffled by the witness, who kept telling the court he could not answer to the suggestions made to him, Mr Addison submitted further that the total votes affected by no signature was 659, 135, out of which Mr  Mahama had 447, 655 while the first petitioner also had 197, 628.
On irregularities, Mr Addison stated that the votes affected were 3,919,385, with 2,612, 788 and 1,228, 229 going to the first respondent and first petitioner respectively.
“The major beneficiary of these anomalies is the first Respondent,” Mr Addison suggested to the witness, who did not agree to it.
“Do you have figures contrary to these?” Mr Addison asked the witness.
“As far as I am concerned, I announced figures according to the ones from the returning officers,” Dr Afari-Gyan replied.
“Precisely, these figures you announced are what is being challenged in court,” Mr Addison stated.