ELECTION PETITION: My evidence is not known to me, I have no alternative figures – Aseidu Nketia

General Secretary of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and the First Witness in the ongoing election 2020 petition brought before the Supreme Court by John Dramani Mahama (Petitioner), says he is not aware of the content of evidence attached to his witness statement to support the case of the Petitioner.

Mr. Aseidu Nketia made the observation while he was cross-examined today the 1st of February 2021 by lawyer for the 2nd Respondent, Akoto Ampaw. During cross-examination, Akoto Ampaw, suggested to the witness that on the allegations of vote padding by the Petitioner, Mr. Nketia, in his exhibits in support of the allegation presented two different sets of data. He indicated that what was filed in hard copy did not reflect what was filed as a soft copy on the pen drive attached to his witness statement.

*Pen Drive Evidence*

The lead lawyer for President Akufo-Addo (2nd Respondent), Akoto Ampaw suggested to the witness that his evidence on the pen drive alleged that there was vote padding for both NPP and for NDC, whereas the hardcopies attached to his witness statement only selected those that point to voting padding for the NPP leaving out those for the NDC.

In his response, the witness, Mr. Aseidu Nketia, stated that he was "not at all aware of the contents" of his pen drive nor was he aware of any of the claims being made by lawyer for the 2nd Respondent.

*EC Declaration*

Further on during cross-examination, Mr. Asiedu Nketia was pinned down to accept that the error of the declaration of the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission on the 9th of December 2020, when it was stated that the total valid votes was thirteen million, four hundred and thirty-four thousand, five hundred and seventy-four (13,434,574) could not have been the total valid votes because an add up of the aggregation of votes for each candidates as mentioned by the Chairperson of the EC during the declaration, amounted to thirteen million, one hundred and twenty-one thousand, one hundred and eleven (13,121,111).

*Vote Padding*

Mr. Akoto Ampaw during cross-examination also suggested that if the alleged padded votes were deducted from the votes of President Akufo-Addo, it would not in any way affect the outcome of the election and that President Akufo-Addo would still have attained the constitutional threshold of more than 50% of the valid votes cast.

Mr. Asiedu Nketia, agreed with the suggestion but explained that his answer was based on the figures of the EC which the Petitioner and his party are disputing.

Mr. Akoto Ampaw concluded his cross-examination by putting it to the witness that John Dramani Mahama, the Petitioner, was not entitled to the reliefs he was praying for in the Petition.

*Questions from the Bench*

After nearly five hours of cross-examining the witness by lawyer for the 2nd Respondent, the Supreme Court through Justice Yaw Appaw, a member of the panel of seven (7), asked Mr. Asiedu Nketia three (3) questions.

The court firstly sought to confirm who generated the information on the pendrive attached to his Witness Statement as Exhibit G. To this, Mr. Nketia stated it could be the elections directorate of his party, the NDC.

The court also asked about the NDC’s own collation of the total valid votes cast and the votes that its candidate, John Mahama and President Akufo-Addo obtained per its (NDC's) own collation. The witness, Mr. Asiedu Nketia informed the court that neither he nor his party had put together any alternative figures to challenge those put out by the constitutional body, the Electoral Commission (EC).

"JUSTICE YAW APAU: Mr. Nketia, you claim the elections have been rigged to favor second Respondent. Is that right?


JUSTICE YAW APAU: Are you able to tell the court, per your own internally collated figures the total number of votes the Petitioner got?

ASIEDU NKETIA: My Lord, I didn't bring the figure with me to the court.

JUSTICE YAW APAU: Mr. Asiedu Nketia can you tell the court, again from your won figures the total number of votes the second Respondent is supposed to have had?


JUSTICE YAW APAU: Thank you very much. That's all."

*Next Court Sitting*

Following his answers to the questions from the Bench, the First Witness of the Petitioner, Aseidu Nketia, was discharged by the court, paving way for the Second Witness of the Petitioner, Michael Kpessa Whyte, to go into the box when the Supreme Court reconstitutes on the next adjourned date, Tuesday, the 2nd of February 2021.


Recent Posts

See All