You are not a truthful witness – EC lawyer to Kpessa-Whyte

Counsel for the Electoral Commission in the ongoing election petition hearing has accused the petitioner’s witness Dr Micheal Kpessa-Whyte of not being a credible witness.

In his cross-examination of a senior lecturer at the University of Ghana, Justin Amenuvor said Dr Kpessa-Whyte was not a truthful witness when he suggested it was the Electoral Commission’s Chairperson who directed him to leave the collation centre.

Dr Kpessa-Whyte who is one of the two representatives of the petitioner stationed at the National Collation Centre (strongroom) of the commission, during the presidential election held on December 7, 2020, said he together with another colleague were deceived by the first respondent to leave to consult the petitioner on December 9, 2020, when they had not signed the declaration form.

“We had been asked by the Electoral Commission’s Chairperson (Jean Mensa) when we brought our concerns to her to leave the room. I have no reason or whatsoever to deceive this honourable court, I can’t lie, we openly told everybody who was there that we were going to come back.

“We left our laptops, calculators and I personally left my vehicle there so why should I lie about our coming back. We left on instructions from the EC Chairperson,” Mr Kpessa-Whyte indicated.

But Mr Amenuvor insisted that the EC Chairperson Jean Mensa had not instructed the representatives to leave the strong room.

When asked whether he personally met the first Respondent, Dr Whyte said he never met the EC chairperson on the said date.

“I maintain that I have no reason to leave the place. She instructed us (Reference to Dr Kpessa-Whyte and Rojo Mettle Nunoo) to leave the place. It is on the basis of instructions that we left the place, we left in good faith only to come to realise it was a ploy to quickly announce the results” he reiterated.

It was required for at least one of the petitioner’s representatives at the strong room to sign the declaration form, but according to Mr Kpessa-Whyte, he did not sign the form.

Dr Whyte attention was also drawn to the use of the word ‘asked’ and ‘instructed’ in his statement. He said he was instructed by the EC Chair, but Justice Nene Amegatse told him, the two words are not the same.

Even though he said the EC chair instructed the two representatives of the petitioner, Justice Amegaste referred to his own witness statement as having said they were asked by the EC chairperson and not instructed.

Prior to his mounting the witness box on Tuesday, in his witness statement submitted to the court, he said he noticed many material irregularities during the entire process of the December 7, 2020 presidential election.

Dr. Kpessa-Whyte said consequently, he and his colleague representative at the “strongroom”, Robert Joseph Mettle-Nunoo, brought the “many material irregularities” to the immediate attention of the NDC Flagbearer and the party.

Mr Johnson Asiedu Nketia, also a witness for the petitioner, after presenting his witness statement and has since been cross-examined by the Respondents’ lawyers and discharged by the court.

Background

Former President, John Dramani Mahama filed a petition at the Supreme Court on December 30, last year, seeking an annulment of the presidential election results.

The NDC Flagbearer wants the apex court to order a re-run of the election between himself and his opponent, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo who is the second respondent in the petition.

The petition is also seeking a mandatory injunction, directing the Electoral Commission to proceed to conduct a second election between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent as required under Articles 63 (4) and (5) of the 1992 constitution.

According to the petitioner, both parties, the NDC and NPP did not meet the 50 plus one threshold as per Ghana’s constitution.