Media reports suggesting that a missing box containing pink sheets that was part of Justice William Atuguba’s copy of exhibits submitted to the accounting firm, KPMG has been found to be a hoax, claims an Accra-based daily.
Very reliable information picked up by a privately-owned newspaper suggests that the box in question, which was part of exhibits that was served on Justice Atuguba by the Supreme Court registrar was actually counted by KPMG.
Our sources at KPMG disclosed that at no point in time did Justice Atuguba send correspondents to the accounting firm to alert them of a missing box containing pink sheets that should have originally been part of the set of boxes that the referee took custody of at the presiding Judge’s office.
This paper can reliably report that the said ‘missing- but- found’ box; marked exhibit MB-P-3836-4796 formed part of the exhibits that were submitted to KPMG in the presence of representatives of the petitioners and the three respondents by the registrar of the court, Mr. Osei Kwaku and later counted and included by the referee in its report.
A copy of the referee’s report gleaned by The Al-Hajj indicates that, whiles the petitioners through its star witness, Dr Bawumia told the court that in the exhibits marked MB-P series they filed 10, 450 pink sheets, it turned out after the count of Justice Atuguba’s pink sheets by KPMG that they filed only 8,905 in the MB-P series.
Whiles the media report has turned out to be false and a grand scheme by the petitioners to water the grounds for the addition of extra boxes of pink sheets in the MB-P series to make up for the backlog of 2,079 pink sheets that the petitioners told the court they have filed, The Al-Hajj can confirm that the registrar of the court, Mr. Osei Kwaku is at the center of all these manipulations.
Intelligence reports picked up by this paper indicates that on May 2, 2013, the Secretary to the Presiding Judge confirmed to KPMG officials that, Mr Osei Kwaku came for two boxes within the MB-P and MB-L series from Justice Atuguba’s set of exhibits under the notion that those two boxes were not supposed to be part of the set of exhibits for the presiding judge, but later, he returned the one from the MB-L series.
The alleged missing-but-found box as reported by the opposition tabloids marked MB-P-3866-4796 was the box that was taken by the registrar and never returned.
Though the registrar did not return the exhibits marked MB-P-3866-4796 to Justice Atuguba’s office according to the secretary, the said exhibit miraculously formed part of the exhibits presented to KPMG officials by the registrar for count as part of Justice Atuguba’s set of exhibits.
Whereas throughout the auditing exercise no issue of missing box was raised, it was after the KPMG officials had taken back the exhibits to the presiding judge’s office that the respondents were taken aback by media reports that the exhibits marked MB-P-3866-4796, which formed part of the exhibits that the referee took custody of, was missing and later found.
Contrary to the publication that the alleged missing but-found-box, labeled MB-P-3866-4796 contains 2000 pink sheets that when counted will sum up to 11, 842 pink sheets that the petitioners told the court they have filed, official documents from KPMG revealed that the said box was counted as part of the exhibits and it contained only 786 pink sheets, instead of 960 as the range specified on the said exhibit.
Meanwhile, credible information from our source at the Supreme Court indicates that, Mr Osei Kwaku has written a letter to the court to inform the nine Justices sitting on the election petition that two boxes of exhibits from the presiding judge, exhibit MB-P-3866-4796 and another exhibit from the MB-L series was mistakenly added to the registry’s copy of the exhibits that was submitted to the referee.
Official reports from KPMG indicates after the auditing of the registry’s copy of the exhibits, the number of exhibits filed by the petitioners stood at 13, 928 out of which 9,148 are pink sheets with unique polling stations, 3, 899 are those that are multiple copies and 881 are pink sheets that are unclear.
Again, after counting of the presiding Judge’s pink sheets, it amounted to 9, 856 out of which 6,734 are pink sheets with unique polling stations; 2, 631 are those that are multiple copies and 491 are pink sheets that are unclear.
From the registrars analogy that MB-P-3866-4796 was mistakenly taken from Justices exhibits and added to the registry’s exhibits, it will stand out that should the said exhibit taken from the registry’s copy of the exhibits, the number will reduce to 13, 142 pink sheets, which is over and above the 11, 842 figure that the petitioners have consistently quoted.
Again, should the said exhibit be added to the control, the number of exhibits will increase to 10, 624, which is also below the 11, 842 exhibits that the petitioners have told the court that they have filed and served on the respondents.