He said this while addressing a press conference outside the Supreme Court on Thursday, February 11, 2021.
It follows the indication by the petitioner’s lawyers that they intend to reopen their case to enable them to subpoena chairperson of the first respondent in the petition to the court to answer questions concerning the rejected election declaration.
The Supreme Court had ruled that Jean Mensa could not be forced to mount the witness box to be cross-examined by the petitioner’s lead counsel Tsatsu Tsikata.
On Monday, February 8, 2021, the petitioner’s legal team closed its case after the respondents’ lawyers had cross-examined the former’s three witnesses.
The respondents’ lawyers then indicated to the court that they did not intend to call any witnesses, urging the court to proceed with the evidence before it.
READ ALSO: I won’t hand over the presidency to any thief – Uhuru Kenyatta sparks controversy (video)
According to them, having cross-examined the petitioner’s witnesses and considered the witness statements filed before the court, as well as the reliefs being sought by the entirety of the petition, they did not think the petitioners have made any groundbreaking case which warrants them calling any witnesses.
The respondents’ lawyers’ submission triggered a debate in court before the bench adjourned the hearing to the next day, Wednesday, February 9, 2021.
When the hearing resumed the next day, the petitioner’s lead counsel spent hours trying to convince the court why it should compel the EC chairperson to be cross-examined, while the bench insisted that it would be a violation of her human right to force her to testify against her will.
However, Tsatsu Tsikata insisted that at the time the respondents’ lawyers made the oral submission to the court that they did not intend to call any witnesses, the first respondent’s chairperson had already “elected” to testify, so it was too late to change her mind.
Mr. Tsikata argued that by the constitutional duty imposed on the Electoral Commissioner as a public servant, she is required to render an account to Ghanaians as to how she executed her constitutional duty of declaring who duly won the 2020 presidential election.
He further argued that by the witness statement of the first respondent which its chairperson signed and, in several affidavits filed to the court in response to the petitioner’s refused application to serve interrogatories on her among others, she had indicated that she would be available to provide the answers being sought during cross-examination when she mounts the witness box.
After hearing all the legal arguments and citation of several precedents amidst disagreements between Mr. Tsikata and members of the bench, the apex court, on Thursday, February 11, 2021, ruled in favour of the respondents’ choice not to adduce evidence by calling any witnesses.
The court simply said that the EC chairperson cannot be compelled to testify against her will, adding it would be wrong in law. It cited several precedents to back its decision.