Johnson Asiedu Nketiah tells the Supreme Court on Monday he is not aware of the content of evidence attached to his witness statement
General secretary of National Democratic Congress (NDC) and first witness in the ongoing election 2020 petition brought before the Supreme Court by John Mahama (Petitioner), says he is not aware of the content of evidence attached to his witness statement to support the case of the petitioner.
Asiedu Nketiah made the observation while he was cross-examined on 1 February 2021 by lawyer for the 2nd Respondent, Akoto Ampaw. During cross-examination, Ampaw suggested to the witness that on the allegations of vote padding by the petitioner, Nketiah, 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), 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, Nketiah stated that he was “not at all aware of the contents” on the pen drive nor was he aware of any of the claims being made by lawyer for the 2nd Respondent.
Further on during cross-examination, Nketiah was pinned down to accept that the error of the declaration of the chairperson of the Electoral Commission on 9 December 2020, when it was stated that the total valid votes was 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 13,121,111.
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.
Nketiah 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.
Ampaw concluded his cross-examination by putting it to the witness that 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 Apau, a member of the panel of seven, asked Nketiah three questions.
The court sought to confirm who generated the information on the pen drive attached to his Witness Statement as Exhibit G. To this, Nketiah 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, Mahama and President Akufo-Addo obtained per its (NDC’s) own collation. The witness, 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. Nketiah, you claim the elections have been rigged to favor second Respondent. Is that right?
ASIEDU NKETIAH: Yes my Lord.
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 NKETIAH: My Lord, I didn’t bring the figure with me to the court.
JUSTICE YAW APAU: Mr. Asiedu Nketiah can you tell the court, again from your won figures the total number of votes the second Respondent is supposed to have had?
ASIEDU NKETIAH: No my Lord.
JUSTICE YAW APAU: Thank you very much. That’s all.
The second witness of the petitioner, Michael Kpessah-Whyte, will go into the box when the Supreme Court reconstitutes on today 2 February 2021.