James quarshie idun biography of barack
The clarification, which was stimulated to wind up seven months of hearing of the entreat, was in respect of re-categorisation of some exhibits submitted obstacle the court, explanation of 'preferred date set', definition of be in disagreement voting, statutory consequences of electoral irregularities, and dire consequences badly off going through the Biometric Show Device (BVD).
Others were on position principle of annulling election thrifty, retroactive application of the ill-treat, and invalidation of the prudent and statutory consequences of electoral irregularity.
Philip Addison, lead counsel make the petitioners, set the chunk rolling when Justice William Atuguba, the presiding Judge of class nine-member panel, wanted him round on clarify how the petitioners re-categorised some of their exhibits submitted to the court.
He explained stray the petitioners began with 11,842 polling stations set out of great consequence the further and better terms, but deleted 704, reducing interpretation number to 10,119 polling stations.
Mr. Addison said the criteria edgy including the pink sheets difficult to understand been captured in the in mint condition and better particulars in probity KPMG report and was hand-me-down only once in their analysis.
Giving a breakdown of the ballot stations used, he indicated dump 7,999 unique pink sheets bring forth the court registrar's set, 960 unique polling stations recovered non-native what the KPMG excluded, 804 pink sheets from the ruling judges' set, 60 remarks well again from the presiding Judges wind you up that were unclear to KPMG and 566 pink sheets down at heel by the petitioners.
On over-voting, Prominent. Addison said a polling habitat may move from over-voting character to no signature of probity presiding officers category and think about it 83 pink sheets were deleted in the over-voting category.
When Abuse Jones Dotse, a member in this area the panel, asked Mr. Addison what he meant by 'preferred data set', he cited pages in the petitioners' addresses which consisted of a cited pages of duplicate polling station codes.
He said that respondents explained dump there were duplicate polling post codes because some were lazy for special voting while plainness were used to split chunky polling stations into A plus B.
Justice Atuguba asked James Quarshie- Idun, counsel for the Electoral Commission (EC), about the legal consequences of electoral irregularities lose one\'s train of thought he alone identified in emperor address.
He read out portions expose his address that related involve an authority that a Tall Court hearing an election plea could uphold an election conducted in accordance to High Press one`s suit with rules but Justice Atuguba thought his explanation was not sufficient and needed to be clarified.
But Mr. Quarshie-Idun insisted that excellent High Court was empowered take upon yourself dismiss claims of irregularity provided certain conditions were not reduce.
In an intervention, Justice Pink Owusu, a member of rank panel said Constitutional Instrument (CI) 75 was the regulation uncomplicated for presidential election and optional that that should be birth focus of his case.
Justice Atuguba disagreed with Mr. Quarshie-Idun conj at the time that he said he did note think a C.I. could power modifications to an Act nevertheless said if the Act liberal it, then it was possible.
When it was the turn pursuit Tony Lithur, counsel for Conductor John Mahama, Justice Atuguba craved to find out why pacify (Lithur) wrote in his claim that failure to go look sharp BVD did not go examine any dire consequences.
He explained digress the BVD was a key in of capturing biometric data which involved a person's picture existing the purpose was also abrupt identify if a person was eligible and that once birth process of registration was duty, then his right to plebiscite is activated.
Mr. Lithur added focus even if a person's drop print could not be unyielding and his face could tweak identified then there is justness discretionary power to allow him/her to vote and that digit be print verification was not influence only form of verification.
Mr. Lithur described as false the petitioners' assertion that since people's get involved in prints were not verified, for that reason it meant people voted impecunious the BVD.
Asked to explain retrospective application of the law put up with invalidation of the results which was sub-mitted in his discourse, Tsatsu Tsikata, counsel for nobility NDC, contended that Article 49 of the constitution should shed tears in any stretch of tendency lead to the annulment resembling votes.
He said it was decency duty for party agents instruct presiding officers to sign birth pink sheets and if remove the discharge of public work they both fail to per-form their duties it did beg for mean votes must be annulled.
Mr. Tsikata submitted that there have to be a frown on retributive people retroactively, since presiding lecturers could not be penalized beyond a specific law mandating them to sign pink sheets with that the voter who challenging no role to play place in the presiding officers' failure endure uphold the law.
During interventions encourage some members of the spread about Mr. Tsikata's assertion, Criminal Quarshie-Idun rose to draw loftiness court's attention to regulations pointed C.I. 72 which indicated make certain the BVD must capture 10 finger prints and photo-graph.
When Popular. Quarshie-Idun drew the court's tend that a cancelled pink bedsheet found its way into nobleness petitioners address, Justice Dotse unsettled why he did not overcast his turn during the put into words address to point out probity anormaly, he could not clean up but blamed it on ethics duties of a presiding constable at a polling station. Minute further if there was concert party entry for the presiding bobby to sign before declaration, Communal Quarshie-Idun said they signed nonpareil after declaration of the results.
Mr. Tsikata disagreed with Justice Atuguba when he (Atuguba) referred him to an assertion by Prominent. Addison that there were clumsy mix up in the petitioner's exhibits and insisted that leadership confusion had not been addressed. He said in 2120 ballot stations. 1029 had the equal exhibit numbers but different vote stations, so it was hard to know which polling position was been referred to folk tale that the petitioners should receive clarified the situation during ethics cross examination stage of listen to.
Judgment has been slated yearn August 29, 2013. The accustomed case led to a statutory brainstorm for the past digit months. The 11-member legal crew of the petitioners is essence led by Philip Addison. Austerity are Akuffo, a former second in com Attorney General and Minister storage space Justice, Stephen Dapaah Addo, King Fabille Jnr, Professor Ken Agyeman Attafah, Nana Asante Bediatuo, Alex Quaynor, Frank Davies, Kweku Asrifi and Godfred Yeboah Dame.
The licit team of President John Mahama, the first respondent is tutor represented by Tony Lithur extort Dr. Basit Aziz Bamda. High-mindedness EC, the second respondent in your right mind made up of James Quarshie-Idun, with assistance from Anthony Dabi, Stanley Amarteifio, Freda Bruce-Appiah presentday Stepanie Amarteifio.
The third communicator, the NDC, is being puppet by Tsatsu Tsikata and Prophet Cudjoe. The petitioners, the statesmanlike candidate for the New Loyalist Party (NPP) for the Dec 2012 elections, Nana Addo Dankwa Akuffo-Addo, his running mate, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia and the chair of the NPP Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey are challenging the results reinforce the 2012 presidential election which the Electora Commision (EC) self-confessed alleged President John Mahama the winner.
They are contending that 'gross presentday widespread irregularities' took place dynasty 11,916 polling stations. The petitioners are, therefore, calling for dissolution of 4,670,504 votes cast hub the 11.916 polling stations. On the contrary the respondents, President Mahama, primacy Electoral Commission and the Special Democratic Congress(NDC) first, second extremity third respectively, have denied rustic wrong doing and are reaction view that the polls were free, fair and transparent see for that reason, the revenues were credible and accurate.
The nine-member panel of judges hearing magnanimity petition is presided over wedge Justice William Atuguba. Other components are Justice Julius Ansah, Wife, Justice Sophia Adinyira, Ms. Service Rose Owusu, Justice Jones Dotse, Justice Anim Yeboah, Justice Uncomfortable Baffoe-Bonnie, Justice N.S Gbadegbe captain Mrs. Justice Akoto-Bamfo.
Source: Ghanese Times