Welcome

....to JusticeGhana Group

 Welcome to JusticeGhana

JusticeGhana is a Non-Governmental [and-not-for- profit] Organization (NGO) with a strong belief in Justice, Security and Progress....” More Details

JusticeGhana NewsArchives

LMVCA: Supreme Court Must Not Allow Technicalities To Further Destroy Our Democracy

press release

LMVCA: Supreme Court Must Not Allow Technicalities To Further Destroy Our Democracy

{sidebar id=10 align=right}Ladies and gentlemen of the press, thank you very much for attending upon our call at a rather very short notice. We have been encouraged by the level of interest you have been showing to every activity of ours.

As you are aware, tomorrow the Supreme Court will hear an application for a review filed by one of our leading members, Abu Ramadan, against the decision of the court in the Mornah case that a decision in an election petition is subject to a review and that it is unconstitutional for the courts to sit on a public holiday. We are confident of the merit in that review and pray that it succeeds.

We have a common cause to our motherland which is to ensure the sustainability of our democracy on the strong foundations of fairness and justice.

You would have noticed that since the election petition trial proper started on April 16, this multi-partisan group of young patriotic Ghanaians, Let My Vote Count Alliance, dedicated to protecting the legal and valid votes of the people against the various instruments of rigging, has been silent. We chose to be quiet for a very good reason: to allow the wheels of justice to pull Ghana's democracy back on track.

However, ladies and gentlemen of the press, we have called you here today, breaking our silence, because we are sensing very dangerous signals from the happenings at the Supreme Court which can't be left to continue without responsible comments. After all, Article 3 of the Constitution empowers we the citizens to take active steps to protect our constitution.

Fortunately, what we are witnessing is being seen also by millions of Ghanaians and many others around the world on radio, internet and television. To this we are grateful to the Chief Justice and the Supreme Court. We will commend all Ghanaians for their level of tolerance and maturity demonstrated since the challenge to the declaration of John Mahama as the President by Dr. Afari Gyan after the 2012 elections began. It is a journey very rare in our parts of the world. That after a disputed election like our last one, an aggrieved party takes to the court to seek redress on a continent so used to seeing weapons of destruction employed for the "resolution" of electoral disputes. It has led to the death of many and the displacement of many more. Ghana has been so far spared that violent path but we have a duty to ensure that the peace that has so far endured does not give way to anarchy. Only true justice can assure us of that desired outcome.

It is also not by magic or any special genetic makeup of the Ghanaian that we have peace. We believe the 2012 elections have not sent us into the abyss of instability and anarchy because of the confidence that the people have in securing justice through the legal system. This confidence must be protected and promoted by all.

It is, however, our genuine fear that the new strategy chosen by the respondents in the full glare of the public stands a very strong evil chance of sacrificing justice and therefore the pillars upon which our peace has been delicately built. With this we mean what we sense to be the new collective strategy of the 1st respondent (John Mahama), the 2nd respondent (the Electoral Commission), and the 3rd respondent (the National Democratic Congress) to use technicalities to deny the people of Ghana justice.

This strategy is to reduce this important election petition to be determined not by the substance of the thousands of evidence which the petitioners (Nana Akufo-Addo, Dr Mahamadu Bawumia and Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey) have brought for adjudication but the form by which those exhibits of evidence were filed and/or served on the respondents. It seems to millions of increasingly frustrated Ghanaians that the whole essence of this case about our democracy, our votes, our governance, is being forced down to how the evidence was packaged and served rather than what is contained in the evidence.

Our message to the court is simple: GHANAIANS ARE WATCHING!

The people would not allow the justice that they seek to be denied through the frivolous and vexatious instruments of technicalities like exhibit numbers whether they begin with four zeros or no zeros at all; whether the exhibit number takes us to a polling station in Techiman or Kpandai. This case is about what happened at polling stations across the country on December 7 and 8, 2012 and nothing less.

That is why the people are saying that the justices must therefore stamp their authority and stop this puppetry of technicalities orchestrated though the joint enterprise of lawyers for John Mahama and the NDC, using the lawyer for the Commission as the convenient, ever-willing instrument of such blatant, unpatriotic evil. People are beginning to see the three masters of technicalities as the Axis of Evil Against Justice!

Is it not ironic that the very people who set up People's Tribunals in the 1980s because they thought even the normal technicalities of due process were denying the people justice are now relying on technicalities to deny the nation a true and faithful trial into how the 2012 presidential race was ran?

We sense among the grassroots that the latest strategy of respondents alleging without proof that they have not been served with exhibits which petitioners want to cross-examine the chairman of the EC on is beginning to test the confidence that the people have in the judicial system.

Many people simply cannot understand why the judges cannot apply the rules and powers that they have to get respondents to let the court know exactly what exhibits they have or don't have. This is causing undue delay and the building of frustration among the people as respondents seemingly put all their eggs of victory into the basket of technicalities.

We are here today to call for calm. To ask the people to remain being patient. We will urge the people to remain calm and continue to put their faith in the competence of the petitioners' legal team and in the wisdom of the nine justices. We do not expect these experienced men and women, on whose shoulders the fate and destiny of our democracy now sit, to fail us. We will continue to pray for them that they muster the courage and principles of their office, the wisdom, the patriotism and responsibility to do what is right, just and fair.

But, we will also wish to remind us all that it was because of the people's frustration with technicalities that led the Kenyan Opposition to ignore the legal option in 2008, leading to the kind of violence which the world never thought could take place in one of Africa's most stable nations. If it happened in Kenya then it can happen in Ghana.

Kenya had its latest presidential election in March, a few months after ours last December. Theirs too was disputed but this time the aggrieved presidential candidate who earlier in 2008 avoided the use of the courts decided to try a peaceful option instead. Raila Odinga and the opposition in 2008 had no confidence in pursuing an election petition. This lack of confidence was very costly.

The 2010 constitution of Kenya ensured that the technicalities that frustrated earlier petitions and the delays that frustrated justice too were all dealt with. Even though the petitioners in Kenya can complain that they did not have enough time to put together their case, the rules of the game were all set before the game and any technicality that was applied was done in fairness and in accordance with the rules set to deliver substantive justice under the circumstances. That is why the decision of the court has been accepted by all and Kenya has now moved on.

Even before this trial started, some prominent Ghanaians, including Otchere-Darko, had written extensively on the dangers of technicalities and delays, drawing from the experiences of Kenya and Nigeria, for example. We need to remind ourselves of them.

Ghanaians need to understand why Kenya’s opposition ignored the legal option in January 2008. Then Raila Odinga made it clear that he did not trust the judges to handle the petition justly. Technicalities and delays had frustrated all previous attempts to seek redress in disputed elections in Kenya. Before Odinga, the only two presidential petitions in Kenya’s history had fallen on the double-edged sword of technicalities and delay.

Kenya’s first election petition case, Kenneth Stanley Njindo Matiba vs Daniel arap Moi, was from the 1992 contest, which many believed was rigged in favour of the incumbent, Moi. After long delays, the case was struck out because the petitioner, who became physically incapacitated at the time, gave his wife power of attorney to sign the petition papers on his behalf. So the court finally threw the case out because of form and not substance! It is the kind of technical challenge which the respondents are now seeking to entreat the Ghana court to focus on and ultimately deny the petitioners the reliefs that they seek. This is so obvious that it is not funny.

The Matiba case in Kenya was followed five years later by the case of Mwai Kibaki vs Daniel arap Moi. This case spent 2 years in the courtroom before it was thrown out on a technicality that President Moi was not personally served with the petition!

For Kenyans, loss of confidence in the judiciary over election petitions led to 1,300 dead and 600,000 others displaced from their homes.

Ghanaians should not think we are immune to this kind of thing. The ethnic configurations of Kenyan politics are, in shape and form, equally alive in Ghana, which like Kenya, took the multi-party route in 1992.

As if to confirm the saying that history always repeats itself and people don’t tend to learn from it, it is becoming increasingly clear that the respondents in our case in Ghana are also pushing the technicalities card. And this is what we believe is a dangerous precedent to be insisting on in this crucial case of our lifetime. What even worries us most is the appearance of the blessing of the court even as the respondents pursue this agenda of theirs. The court has given the respondents too much room with which they are beginning to stifle the entire process.

It is very frustrating even for those of us watching the proceedings on TV as the respondents hold the judges of the highest court and 25 million Ghanaians to ransom as they insist on not disclosing the quantity of pinksheets served them by bailiffs from the registry and yet will not allow their witnesses to answer questions on pinksheets they claim have not been served.

As a result, petitioners are helpless and even the Justices appear to be helpless because they appear to the people to be failing to stamp their authority on this deliberate negative strategy.

The recent developments in the court are sending the wrong signals that the court option as a resolution to electoral disputes may be a waste of time and resources. We do not wish Ghana to also travel the hard road that our East African neighbours did. It is a path that none of us should pray or wish for and that is why we are drawing the nation's attention to it.

Ghanaians are simply not prepared to see the interest of substantive justice giving way to technicalities. They would understand, for instance, if after the KPMG count of exhibits, it comes out that certain pinskheets were not served per the court order so petitioners can no longer rely on them. They would understand if the court found that indeed respondents were not served with certain exhibits and must be served and Dr Bawumia further cross-examined on them.

But what the people would NEVER accept is for evidence before the court to be ignored because they were not properly labelled or categorised.

At the crux of the difficulty is an issue of mislabelling and not a lack of evidence. To allow such straight forward, curable technical errors to deny the people justice would amount to a coup d'etat against the Constitution of the Republic. And, Article 3 of the Constitution gives citizens the authority to use every means possible to resist any attempt to overthrow the Constitution. We are, therefore, giving notice that LMVCA and all well-meaning Ghanaians would do just that if we are forced to do just that.

In the meantime, we will call on all Ghanaians to remain calm and expect nothing less than true substantive justice from the court. We continue to believe in the wisdom of the nine justices of the Supreme Court and will appeal to all our supporters to continue to have faith in the judicial system. But, we shall remain vigilant and not allow our democracy to be destroyed and for those who seek to do so to succeed.

Thank you and may God bless you all.

……signed……

David Boateng Asante

Sammy Awuku

Charles Owusu Abu Ramadan

Media expert, human rights lawyer dismiss GJA’s anti-gay moral crusade

human rights

Media expert, human rights lawyer dismiss GJA’s anti-gay moral crusade

{sidebar id=10 align=right}Media expert, Prof. Audrey Gadzekpo has dismissed the call on journalists to take an anti-gay stance against gays and lesbians in their reportage. The call was made by Affail Monney, president of the Ghana Journalists Association (GJA).

Mr. Affail Monney told Joy News on Thursday urging anti-gay media stance.

“The media do not have to take a posture of neutrality as far as right and wrong are concerned”, Mr. Affail Monney said, adding that homosexuality is an issue that is totally wrong, it is morally repugnant, culturally offensive, legally unacceptable and because our laws frown on man sleeping with man and woman sleeping with woman.

But speaking on Joy FM's Top Story, Professor Audrey Gadzekpo of the School of Communications, University of Ghana said she found the appeal by the GJA president "bizzare" and "wrong-footed".

She said it was the responsibility of journalists to protect the rights of the vulnerable and marginalized in society. The practice of journalism needed broad-minded and critical thinkers to present thoroughly investigated issues of public concern, she added.

She acknowledged the deep cultural bias against the practice of homosexuality in the country and challenged journalists to find out from conservative groups like religious organisation and chiefs, the basis for this bias.

In her view, issues of homosexuality are complex and the president’s pronouncement did not consider tons of research on the matter. It would be better for Affail Monney to "leave evangelical right wing pastors" to make pronouncements on the issue, she suggested.

She compared the president's call to apartheid South Africa where a white minority marginalized and denied a black majority certain basic human rights because of the colour of their skin.

The associate professor advised the GJA to focus on 'the morality of the issues' facing journalists and "look after the welfare of your people" instead of attempting to foist his "personal views" on the Association.

“I can think of 10 million things we should be doing than what people do in their bedroom”, Gadzekpo said.

Professor Attuafuah, a human rights lawyer and criminologist also contributed to the discussion.

He said although section 104 of the criminal code criminalizes "unnatural carnal knowledge", proving this would involve installing "cameras in bedrooms".

The gay question is a question of identity, he said, adding even if Ghana had a law against homosexuality, it would be impossible for the law to prosecute persons based on any "outward manifestation" of the practice such as men holding of hands or the wearing of certain gay symbols.

To him, there are numerous, compelling challenges of our time, that deserved the attention of the Association.

One of them is the pervasive lawlessness in our society, the criminologist pointed out.

The call by the president may be an attempt to "ride on the high crest of public disavow" to make a name for himself, he asserted.

From: Edwin Appiah/Myjoyonline

Live Text, Day 29: Addison to continue cross-examination of Afari Gyan

elections

Live Text, Day 29: Addison to continue cross-examination of Afari Gyan

{sidebar id=10 align=right}Counsel for Petitioners Philip Addison is set to continue his cross examination of Dr Afari Gyan, star witness for the second Respondents in the ongoing Presidential Election Petition.

The cross examination which began yesterday had to be halted for the President of the Panel Justice William Atuguba to give new directions on how the audit of the pink sheets exhibits by KPMG will be conducted.

The continued cross-examination of Dr Afari Gyan is expected to be anything but friendly.

Proceedings continue;

The Panel of judges have taken their seats on the bench. The lawyers introduce their team to the bench as Dr Kwadwo Afari Gyan walks into the dock to be cross-examined by Philip Addison. He is reminded of his oath.

Philip Addison is up. He asks the witness that if a chief is allowed to vote without being verified, as he explained yesterday where will it be recorded.

Dr Afari Gyan says it will be recorded to be among the people who have voted.

Addison asks if there is a place on the pink sheet where that information will be recorded. He hands him a pink sheet exhibit to tell the court exactly where that information will be recorded

Dr Afari Gyan takes it and says C1 will be the place where that information will be recorded.

Addison asks him what C1 says?

Dr Afari Gyan answers: what is the number of ballot issued to voters on the voters Register?

Addison suggests to witness that if a chief is not verified by the machine before voting that information will be entered in C3.

Dr Afari Gyan says No.

Addison asks witness to read what is the instruction in C3 and he says voters who were identified but not with the verification machine.

Addison says Omanhene was not verified by the BVD and so the information should be recorded in C3.

Afari Gyan says no. Addison moves on to daily prints and asks witness if it was the case that political parties were provided with daily print outs of registered voters.

Afari Gyan says to the extent possible daily print outs were issued. Addison wants him to be clear on that. He says well if the machines develop faults at some point, it meant the print out for the day could not be given.

Addison pushes further by asking if it was then the case that print outs were not given daily to the parties. Afari Gyan says to the extent possible. Addison pushes further for clear answers.

Addison asks if the EC itself has daily print outs. Afari Gyan says if nothing had gone wrong with the machine they will have it. Addison probes further

Oppression

Justice Atuguba intervenes. He accuses counsel of oppressing the witness. He says the bench has a duty to protect the witness from unfair question and they will not abandon that duty.

Addison says he does not doubt the power and duty of the bench. He continues by asking if the witness knows the details on the daily print outs. Afari Gyan says it includes names sexes and biodate of the voter.

Addison asks if it included the pictures of the voters, Afari Gyan says it will not include it.

Addison says after the registration ended the EC compiled the provisional register right? Yes my Lord Afari Gyan answers.

Addison says the EC did not provide the NPP with a provisional copy of the register. Dr Afari Gyan says: I don't know if they got.

Addison suggests to the witness that the NPP was not given a provisional register.

Afari Gyan says yes but adds no party was given the provisional register.

Addison asks if the provisional register was exhibited. Afari Gyan says yes.

For how long was it exhibit? For ten days, Afari Gyan answers.

Addison asks what the reason could be for exhibiting the voters register. Afari Gyan says it was an opportunity for the EC to check if the correct data had been collected. It was also for people to object names that was in the register but who were not supposed to be.

Addison asks if as EC chair, he new the reason for which the provisional register was supposed to be given to the parties. Afari Gyan says among other things says the parties were to make an input in clearing multiple registrations and help the commission to come out with the proper register.

Loss of data

Addison makes reference to the evidence by the witness to the effect that the EC lost some data during its compilation of the register. He asks witness if this anomaly was rectified before the voters register was exhibited.

Afari Gyan says it was during the exhibition that they realised that they had lost their data.

"So at the time you put out the provisional register did you know exactly the number of people who did not appear on the provisional register even though registered," Addison asks. "I didn't," Afari Gyan answers.

Addison asks if the people whose name did not appear in the provisional register show up during exhibition. Afari Gyan says no.

Addison asks what was done next. Afari Gyan says the EC decided that it was through no fault of theirs that their names did not appear in the register so the EC had to take steps to bring them back into the register. He confirms a special registration exercise was done to bring them back into the register. He says an estimated 11,000 people were registered as a result of these anomaly.

Addison says the EC still thought there were more people to register even after registering the 11,000 people. Afari Gyan affirms.

Addison asks if that was the reason for which C3 was introduced onto the pink sheet. Afari Gyan confirms.

What do you mean by loss of data, Addison asks. Afari Gyan says the information could not be found in the computer.

Addison asks how that is possible if the information was stored on a pen drive. EC chair maintains that was happened. The names could not be found in the computer.

Addison asks how many names were missing. Afari Gyan says he cannot say off hand what the number is.

Addison says the EC had forms 1C and 1A and could easily have checked the number of people who were lost as a result of the loss of data. Afari Gyan confirms.

Addison asks, so how many people were missing per the documents on forms 1C and 1A. Afari Gyan says he cannot tell.

Addison fires saying, you proceeded to create a portion of C3 on the ballot without ascertaining the number of people missing in the voters register.

Afari Gyan says yes.

Addison suggests to Afari Gyan that the so-called instructions to the presiding officers not to fill the C3 column of the pink sheet or carry form 1A to the polling stations was only an after thought because the EC had neither pleaded it in their answer to the petition nor in their affidavits.

Training Manual

Addison hands the EC training manual to the EC chair. He asks him to open Page 11. The page lists all voting materials needed at the polling station. Addison says there is no form 1C. Afari Gyan says Yes and that means that form 1C were not supposed to go to the polling stations.

Addison says if there is no form 1C in the list of voting materials how is it the case that presiding officers will be instructed during training that form 1C should not be sent to the polling stations. Dr Afari Gyan says it is precisely because the form 1C will not be used

Addison again asks him to open page 51 of the manual. He obliges. Page 51 talks about Statement of poll for the president of Ghana. He says C3 on page 51 differs from the one on the pink sheet[ the pink sheet is also called the statement of poll]. Addison asks what C3 on page 51 of the document relates to? Afari Gyan says there is no C3 in there.

Addison says that is precisely the point. The EC could not have trained its officials on documents that did not exist in its manual.

Addison asks witness if he is aware that entries were made all over the country in C3 on voting day. He says yes but the entries were made in error.

Addison suggests forcefully that no instruction was given to the presiding officers that no entries should be made in C3. Afari Gyan disagrees.

One of the judge intervenes. He finds it curious that in the manual that there is not mention of C3 at some point, yet in another page of the manual it instructs officers to add C1, C2, C3 and C4 to get C6.

Afari Gyan says there was an error in printing.

Addison asks if the numbers that were put in C3 were generated from the elections and if so where on the pink sheet was it supposed to be?

Afari Gyan says it will be difficult to tell where it should have been.

Printing of Pink sheets

When was the pink sheets printed, Addison asks. Afari Gyan says he cannot tell the exact date but hints it could after October 20, 2012.

Addison asks when C1 75 was gazzeted. Afari Gyan says he cannot tell the exact date. Addison provides the date as 14 August 2012 and came into in being on September 2012. He hands Afari Gyan a document that spells out the new law and the date on which it was gazzeted.

Addison asks if these regulations were passed at the instance of the Commission. Yes My lord, Afari Gyan answers

At the time of passing the law the implication was that every body should be verified biometrically is that correct, Addison asks, Yes My lord Afari Gyan responds.

CI 75 is the law that introduced the use of the biometric verification process in the elections.

Addison then suggests to the witness that it could not have been the case that EC had no idea what the law was about and therefore decided to flout it by instructing presiding officers not carry the documents along to the polling stations.

Voters Register

The EC in its affidavits said the voters register was 14,310,680 million right, Addison asks. Afari Gyan confirms.

But Asiedu Nketia gave a different figure of 14,031,793, Addison asserts. He says in the EC's amended answer the figure given is 14,310,793.

Gyan says if that was the answer given by the EC in affidavits it will be in error.

Addison asks if he saw the EC's affidavits at all before coming to court. He says he did not prepare the affidavits.

Addison says the EC gave a figure of 13,917,366 as the figure on provisional register. Afari Gyan says yes if that was what was given.

Addison continues saying after foreign registrations the number shot up from 13,917,366 to the 14,158,890 million a difference of 241,544, is that right. Afari Gyan hesitates. Addison then hands him the EC's own pleadings and ask the witness to read. Afari Gyan reads confirming the figures.

Addison says when the EC was asked to supply information on data of voters who constituted the difference of 241,544 the EC provided a little over 2,000 names. Afari Gyan says only 705 people were registered in the missions.

Addison probes further saying 51 names were repeated in the list of foreign voters supplied to the petitioners. Afari Gyan retorts, saying only 15 names were repeated.

Addison tries to take witness through the list of 51 repeated names. Those people had the same names; same sexes, same ages, same locations but different voter IDs.

Afari Gyan confirms the names were repeated and that one person had two different voter IDs.

There are 51 people with double registrations, Addison fires. If you say so, Afari Gyan answered.

Court takes a short break to allow for the witness to sort out the entire lists of 51 names of double registrations.

Recess

Court resumes at 1:45pm

Caution to partisan lawyers and reporters

One judge, warns Amaliba, a member of the NDC legal team and political commentators not to misrepresent the facts in the public and media. Tsatsu Tsikata also comments on the matter and accuses other lawyers on TV for misrepresenting the facts.

Atuguba says legal representation is paramount in a democracy. He advises members to keep it as sacrosanct as possible. Atuguba says the importance of the profession is so paramount and must be kept as such.

Afari Gyan is reminded of his oath as cross-examination continues.

Addison asks witness if he has checked the list

He says he has two observations. The first of which he says is that the first name are two different people. In fact they are twins to one of the people in foreign missions. He admits though that the rest have been duplicated. The second is that the duplicates each have only one polling station and could only vote once.

The voter IDs are different which means each one of them could vote, is that right? No says Afari Gyan because once they belong to the same polling stations they could not vote.

Addison says one could have voted without being verified as he Afari Gyan has said that popular people could vote without being verified.

Afari Gyan says only popular people could vote without being verified.

Addison asks who in the EC undertook the registration of voters abroad, permanent or temporary officials. Permanent, Afari Gyan says.

Addison asks how possible is for permanent officials of the EC to go abroad to register 705 people at the same location and yet duplicate 50 people.

Addison says from the voters registered abroad, voting was done by proxy isn't it? Afari Gyan says he cannot tell.

Addison probes further by asking if its possible for two people to be allowed to vote by proxy for these peoples whose names have been duplicated in the foreign registration. Afari Gyan says it is possible if the two people have pictures on their ID cards.

By what authority did the EC register the people, Addison asks, Afari Gyan says by the authority of the law. He mentions the Representation of the Peoples Act. Addison provides a copy of the law and tells witness to tell the court if indeed it was based on this law that the registration was conducted.

Afari Gyan reads Section 8 of the Peoples Representation Law to justify the registration abroad. Philip Addison says that law has been ammended.

He suggests that the EC did not have authority to select a particular class of people to go through the registration. He adds the registration was discriminatory against certain class of Ghanaians.

"I deny that" Afari Gyan says.

Philip Addison decides to tender the list of double registration through the witness.

Biometric verification device

Addison: Does the BVD have a list of registered voters. Yes it has. The list is taken from the database into the BVD.

Addison: The register stored in the BVD is not limited to a particular polling station. Afari Gyan says he cannot know for sure.

Addison suggests that the register in the BVD covers the whole constituency.

That the BVD are not interconnected. They are not, Afari Gyan admits.

So that a voter can move from one polling station to another to vote, Addison asks. The voter cannot because each polling station has exclusive names of people. The register is restricted to a polling station.

Do these BVD have serial numbers? Addison asks. Not to my knowledge.

So it means the BVD can be moved around across the country, isn't it? They are numbers but we don't call them serial numbers, Afari Gyan answers.

"So what do you call them", Addison probes further. "We call them numbers," Afari Gyan answers.

Addison: Are these numbers unique to a each BVD? You are right they are, Afari Gyan answers.

Are these numbers entered by the presiding officer before voting. No Afari Gyan answers.

Who enters these numbers and where are they etered, Addison probes further.

Before the BVD is sent to the polling station, the district officer should have a record of which BVD is going to which polling station, Afari Gyan answers.

Addison says when the BVD broke down and were replaced, were records also taken. Yes records were taken, Afari Gyan says.

Do you have a rough idea the number of BVD purchased for the purpose of election 2012. Over 33000 were bought Afari Gyan answers.

Addison asks who manned the BVD during voting. Afari Gyan says techinical people trained by the EC.

Addison asks what role the temporary workers of the EC played. Afari Gyan says if they were not manning the BVD machines at the polling station they will play no role.

Addison suggests that it was entirely possible for an IT person to add or subtract names on the voters register on the BVD.

Quarhie-Idun is up with a vehement objection. He says the Petitioners have not accused them of any wrong doing so to suggests that the BVDs were manipulated is unacceptable.

Five Voters Register

Addison hands over to the witness exhibits of the five voters register. He says the registers were tendered by the witness in his examination. Afari Gyan admits he tendered them.

Addison asks if there are ticks in the register currently before him. Afari Gyan says no.

Addison: Were they in fact the registers used at the polling stations, Afari Gyan says no.

NB The second Respondent had used the five registers to rebut allegations made by the petitioners that there were more votes in the ballot boxes than there were on the voters register.

Objection

Addison offers to be tendered a pink sheet relating to one of the five Voters Registers. Quarshie-Idun raises an objection. He says the pink sheet has a different exhibit numbers. He adds that the petitioners have presented a list of pink sheet exhibits whose numbers are different from what they have in their custody.

Tony Lithur enters the fray he describes as "funny" and "unethical" differences in labels of pink sheets.

Tsikata jumps in. Judges are at a loss. More than one of the judges question the propriety of the objection being raised, especially so when the pink sheet in question is before the court and had been shot into prominence by the counsel for the second Respondent who showed it to his witness to rebut the claims of over voting in certain polling stations. Tsikata says it is a serious matter and it could possibly be the case

Philip Addison continues with his cross examination.

He asks if witness can tell the figure in the A1 column of the pink sheets. 250, Afari Gyan says. Addison asks what is the figure on B1. 12 says Afari Gyan. Addison goes ahead to ask witness the definition of B1.“ What is the number of voters on the voters Register,” Afari Gyan answers.

Yesterday you told the court there was no over voting at this polling station, Addison Fires. Afari Gyan says he was not asked whether there was over voting or not.

Addison asks if he can confirm if there is over voting on the face of the pink sheets.

Afari Gyan says he sees all kinds of figures on the pink sheet and so he cannot say for a fact if there was over voting.

Addison asks if his declaration he made on December 9 included the figures of this pink sheet. Afari Gyan says he presumed so.

Addison shows him a column for rejected votes. It has the number 1 written in there. Afari Gyan confirms this.

Addison asks him to add total votes and rejected ballots to arrive at total votes in the ballot. Afari Gyan adds 12 plus 1 and says it is 13.

Addison asks if that proves an over-vote of 1. But Afari Gyan says that cannot be the case. it is not automatic. There are 'all kinds of things happening' on this pink sheet. It requires proper scrutiny, he says.

Addison tells him that pink sheet emanates from him. Afari Gyan agrees.But insists that he sees so much that is wrong on the pink sheet and therefore he needs to do proper scrutiny to arrive at any conclusion.

Addison asks him why he tendered the register of this polling station with the intention to show there was not over-vote.

Afari Gyan responds he was asked to look at the register to determine to figure to be entered into A1. If B1 is higher then the figure down there would not show an over-vote.

So the purpose of using the register was to show an over-vote, Addision suggests but Afari Gyan says no, it was to explain the figure in B1.

Were you at the polling station to show what should have been entered there?, Addison inquires. Afari Gyan says no he wasn't but as an election adminstrator he knows what was supposed to be done.

Addison asks if if he realizes that the pink sheet before him was used to declare the results. He urges him to stick to the pink sheet.

But Afari Gyan says he is a difficulty to limiting himself to the pink sheets for purposes of answering 'deeper questions'.

Addison asks if a polling station in addition to its register has an absent voters list and a transfer voters list it would affect the number of registered eligible voters. Afari Gyan says yes.

Addison asks if there was an absent voters list at the polling station in reference. Afari Gyan says there was no list.

Addison says if there was, it would have affected the total number of eligible voters which could differ from the number on the voters register. Absolutely, Afari Gyan says.

Addison says if that is the case, they have to go by the information on the pink sheets because the register by itself will not tell a true story but Afari Gyan disagrees.

Addison suggests to witness that the number of persons on the register as indicated on the pink sheet exceeds the number on the register given to the parties.

Afari Gyan says he needs clarity on the question.

Addison rephrases and says the aggregate number of voters on the pink sheet in the 11,115 polling stations in contention far exceeds the total number of voters on the register.

Afari Gyan says that will be wrong. Addison snaps, saying it is wrong and insists if the EC chair is aware that was the case.

Afari Gyan says he is not aware.

Philip Addison suggests to him that the total number of voters on the pink sheets in respect of 11,115 polling stations is 6,762,882 but the total number of registered voters on the register given to the NPP in respect of the same number of polling stations is 5,799,994. Afari Gyan says he is unaware of that.

Addison asks how many ballot papers were printed. Afari Gyan says he cannot say off hand.

Addison then makes a projection by saying if the total number of registered voters is in the region of 14 million and the EC requires that ballot papers printed must be ten per cent more than the total number of registered voters. Afari Gyan says that will be an accurate presentation.

Addison asks how many printing presses printed the ballot papers but Afari Gyan says he cannot tell. He would have to cross check before giving a specific figure.

But the parties were represented at all the printing presses, Addison asks. They were, Afari Gyan confirms.

Addison suggests to the witness that the ballots issued to the 11,115 polling stations as gleaned from the face of the pink sheets is 11,511,207.

Afari Gyan says he cannot confirm that figure. Addison tells him to record the figure and cross-check over the week-end.

Addison says the total ballots according to the EC based on the registered voters plus ten percent for the 11,115 polling stations will be 6,385,058.

Afari Gyan says he has no way of knowing. He adds that it has be shown that figures on the pink sheet could be wrong and therefore the figures could not be relied upon to make a definitive comment on the number as gleaned on the face of the pink sheet and the actual figures in the register.

Addison suggests to witness that both the total number of voters on the face of the pink sheets as well as the ballot papers issued to the polling stations. Your declarations were based on these exaggerated numbers, Addison fires. Afari Gyan disagrees.

Addison questions the witness why they decided to give presiding officer bundles of ballot papers in 100s, 50s and 25s when they could easily have issued bundles of 5s and 10s. He finds out from the witness what law mandated the EC to give presiding officers bundles of 100s, 50s and 25s.

Afari Gyan says it was purely an administrative decision not backed by law. He insists it is easier dealing with the ballot papers in bundles of 100s, 50s and 25s.

Addison asks him to refer to the pink sheet exhibits before him and mention the number of ballots issued.

Afari Gyan mentions the figure as 250. Addison says that is exactly the problem. That the total number of people on the register was 12 and yet 250 ballots were issued to that polling station.

Afari Gyan says immediately he could tell an error and the error is that the total number of people which is given as 12 on the pink sheet is wrong. It could not have been the total number of people in the register.

Addison challenges him to take a look at the corresponding register of that pink sheet and tell the court the total number on the register.

Afari Gyan looks at it and says the total number of registered voters is 12 which means Philip Addison is right but which also means that the presiding officer was not given 250 ballots.

Addison suggests to him that he has to stick with the figures on the face of the pink sheets. Afari Gyan says the figures on the pink sheets are contaminated with palpable errors.

Addison asks what he did about those errors, Afari Gyan laughs.

Judge intervenes

One of the judges intervenes. He asks Addison to take a good look at the pink sheet and he will know that the 250 that has been mentioned is wrong. It appears the figure there is 25, the zero has been cancelled and cannot be 250. Addison says he did not mention the figure 250. It was the witness who did. In any case he adds, that even if the figure 25 was taken, it still meant that over 100 percent of ballot papers were given to that polling station instead of the ten per cent. He suggests that if the EC had supplied bundles in 5s and 10s they would not have over supplied some of these ballots papers which eventually ended up in the ballot box unaccounted.

Addison tenders another pink sheet exhibit and asks witness to mention the figure in the A1 column. Afari Gyan mentions 100.

Addison asks again what the figure is at the B1 column. B1 is 21, Afari Gyan answers.

Addison asks witness to tell the court the total vote in the ballot box to which the witness answers 67.

"So you agree there is a clear over vote here," Addison asks. Once again My Lord, No. He says the register indicates that 21 in B1 is wrong.

Addison asks witness if his declaration on December 9 was based on the total number on the register.

Afari Gyan says yes because the total number of persons entitled to vote is recorded in that declaration.

Addison asks what the total number was to which Afari Gyan mentions 14,301,680. Addison suggests to witness that the total number of registered persons on each polling stations far exceeded the total number of registered persons supplied to the NPP. Afari Gyan says that cannot be true.

Addison says the total number of registered voters gazeted for the presidential elections was different from that of the Parliamentary election. That cannot be correct, Afari Gyan says.

Addison says the gazeted number for the Parliamentary elections was 14,301,680 and when the declaration was made for the presidential elections, the figure given by Afari Gyan was 14,158,890 am i right?

Afari Gyan says yes but "it was in error".

"So everything was in error in this elections," Addison jabs. "My Lord i don't see how anybody can come to that conclusion," Afari Gyan retorts.

Addison returns to the pink sheet in the custody of the Afari Gyan and asks him to confirm if there was over voting on that pink sheet.

Afari Gyan admits there was ultimately an over vote.

Case adjourned to Monday.

Addison fires and says so everything

From: Myjoyonline.com

GJA president defends anti-gay stance

human rights

GJA president defends anti-gay stance

The president of the Ghana Journalists Association has spoken in an unequivocal term, defending directive to journalists to take up an anti gay posture when they report on issues of homosexuality.

Mr Affail Monney told Joy News’ Anny Osabutey that the directive was to reecho a position taken by the late former President Atta Mills, and affirmed by the sitting President, John Dramani Mahama.

According to him, journalists cannot go contrary to what has been proffered by the chief executive of the nation and has had a popular acclamation from the general public.

The act is also illegal, the GJA president maintained.

Furthermore, the directive, Mr Affail Monney said, is supposedly borne out of the Association’s decision to lead a moral crusade against the practice in the country.

In Ghana the practice is frowned upon but the laws on homosexuality is not explicit.

“Professionally we should not be seen to be working outside the law or contrary to the law… it is an offence to have unnatural carnal knowledge… it is rooted in morality, it is rooted in legality,” he opined.

One of the reasons the GJA president also advanced for the directive was that, the media does not have to take a posture of neutrality as far as right and wrong are concerned in this issue.

But some editors Joy News spoke to have questioned the directive with one saying it is ill-timed.

From: Isaac Essel/Myjoyonline.com

Let’s Be Innovative To Curb Fire Outbreaks - Akufo-Addo Charges Authorities

tragedy

Let’s Be Innovative To Curb Fire Outbreaks - Akufo-Addo Charges Authorities

{sidebar id=12 align=right}The presidential candidate of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, has made a passionate appeal to the relevant authorities to come up with innovative plans for the construction of modern markets that will make it difficult for the recurrence of market fires.

Nana Akufo-Addo explained that the Ghana Institution of Engineers, the Ghana Institution of Architects, the Architectural Engineering Services Limited (AESL) and the Ghana National Fire Service ought to come together in designing the markets in order to prevent such outbreaks which had caused damage to property and lives and led to loss of livelihoods of many entrepreneurs in these markets over the years.

“There have been too many fire outbreaks in our markets lately, and it is high time we took serious steps to bring the situation under control,’’ Nana Akufo-Addo emphasised.

In a statement to express his deepest condolences to the victims of Sunday morning's fire outbreak at the Kantamanto Market, Nana Akufo-Addo consoled the victims of the Kantamanto fire disaster on the loss of their wares running into millions of cedis.

He described the fire outbreak “as a very sad day in the history of Ghana” and stressed the need for the relevant authorities to put in place quickly the necessary measures to forestall the occurrence of such disasters.

According to Nana Akufo-Addo, statistics from the Ghana National Fire Service indicated that barely two weeks into 2013 the country recorded 265 fire disasters, including the recent one that occured at the Kumasi Central Market.

He called for immediate steps to arrest the problem, adding that this “calls for a standardised strategic plan in designing markets in the country to prevent the incessant fire outbreaks.”

He said aside the major role entrepreneurs in such commercial markets played in the growth of the economy of the country, they were also the major breadwinners of their various families and that when such disasters occurred, they tended to have serious repercussions on both the economy and families.

Source: Daily Graphic/Ghana