The attorneys for President Nana Akufo-Addo in the progressing election petition are pondering subpoenaing previous President John Mahama, the petitioner, if his legal advisors proceeded to subpoena the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission, Mrs Jean Mensa to affirm in the dock.
The Supreme Court administered on Thursday, 11 February 2021 that it can’t urge Mrs Mensa, the observer of the primary respondent (Electoral Commission) and Mr Peter Mac Manu, the observer of the subsequent respondent, President Nana Akufo-Addo, to mount the dock.
Mr Mahama’s legal counselors have couldn’t help contradicting the decision and communicated their goal to petition for a survey, return the case and furthermore subpoena Mrs Mensa into the observer box.
Addressing columnists after the court administering on Thursday, Information Minister-assign Kojo Oppong Nkrumah likewise alluded to the probability of the President’s legal counselors hauling Mr Mahama into the dock in a blow for blow way.
“Contingent upon what the court chooses to do, our senior legal counselors will make their next line of move.
“Surely, I have heard discussions, I couldn’t say whether I have their authorization to say this, I’ve heard discussions by some that in the event that they choose for subpoena the EC Chair, possibly, we should likewise choose for subpoena the petitioner to be brought into the crate.
“I couldn’t say whether they will consent to it by the day’s end yet it is important for the different discussions”, he said.
The Ofoase Ayirebi MP additionally blamed Mr Mahama for deserting his own case, clarifying that not at all like the President’s star observer, who goes to court procedures as a general rule, Mr Mahama, who is the one testing the 2020 official election brings about court, has showed up only twice in court.
“I continue to disclose to you that Chairman Mac Manu comes here consistently, readied that in the event that they [petitioner’s lawyers] pass a boundary and we need to do that [mount the observer box], we’ll do that”.
“However, as you have seen, dissimilar to the petitioner who, as a portion of my associates have been proposing, gives off an impression of being surrendering the situation, since he’s been here twice, we are consistently here; on the off chance that it gets important, we’ll be glad to mount the case”, he said.
Talking about the court’s decision on Thursday, Mmr Oppong Nkrumah said: “We are of the deferential, humble view that as the court said today, the guideline is that you can’t force a gathering under these conditions to cite proof”.
He contended that “regardless of whether you demonstrate some new proof in outrageous conditions under which your case ought to be re-opened and afterward you accompanied your second application for subpoena; what is that subpoena expected to accomplish? To propel the individual that the court has said can’t be constrained to give proof, the subpoena is presently to urge that individual to come and give proof”.
“We figure it will be a fascinating arrangement of contentions”, he noted, adding: “However, any place it goes, as we have said: on the off chance that it becomes essential that we put observers in the container to react to issues, we are more than cheerful”.
Please share and comment below.