[ads1]
Former President John Dramani Mahama has urged the Supreme Court to uphold his presidential election petition and nullify the Electoral Commission’s (EC) declaration that President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, won the December 7,2020 presidential election.
In a closing address to the apex court, lawyers for the petitioner argued that the evidence on record including the EC’s own declaration on December 9 clearly showed that no candidate obtained more than 50 per cent of the valid votes cast to be declared President -elect as prescribed by Article 63 (3) of the 1992 Constitution.[ads2]
The lawyers therefore urged the court to uphold the petitioner’s case and order the EC to organise a run-off between former President Mahama and President Akufo-Addo.
The closing address was signed by Mr Tony Lithur, one of the lawyers of the petitioner.
Unchallenged evidence
The legal team of the petitioner invited the court to take notice of the refusal of the EC to put forward the Chairperson of the EC, Mrs Jean Adukwei Mensa, to testify.
According to the petitioner, after presenting his case, the burden was now on the EC to show that Mrs Mensa indeed “inadvertently” made errors in her declaration, and whether the subsequent corrections were based on correct figures as required by law.[ads3]
“1st respondent (EC), by not calling evidence, did not even begin to discharge that burden,” the closing address said.
Different case
Another argument presented in the closing address was that the petition filed by former President Mahama was different from the one file by then candidate Akufo-Addo in 2013, challenging the 2020 presidential election.
According to the legal team, the 2013 presidential election petition was challenging alleged infractions that took place on about 11,000 polling stations , while the current petition filed by their client was challenging the the declaration by the Chairperson of the EC.[ads4]
They therefore argued that the petitioner is not under any obligation to indicate the number of valid votes he obtained because it had no bearing on the case.
“It is not the petitioner who claims that no candidate obtained more than 50 per cent of the valid votes cast. This is simply what the figures in the declaration of the Chairperson of the 1st respondent (EC) entails,” the closing address added.
– graphicsonline[ads5]
