Editor-In-Chief of the New Crusading newspaper, Abdul Malik Kweku Baako, has indicated that had the court not redirected the respondents to the auditing firm KPMG, the court proceedings would have been derailed.
According to him, it was mischievous for the respondents to say that a number of boxes containing the pink sheets have been added to the previous ones, adding “If the court had listened to them, it could have put the whole process in disarray.
The respondents on Tuesday raised an alarm that a head count of the number of boxes of pink sheets at the registry showed an increase in number.
Mr Tsatsu Tsikata alleged that there had been an additional seven boxes of pink sheet exhibits added to the number to be counted and audited.
However, in ruling on the issue, the Supreme Court presided by Judge William Atuguba asked respondents in the election petition to lay their concerns before the referee, KPMG.
According to the court, this will enable the auditing firm to include the concerns in its report after concluding with their auditing of the pink sheets.
Contributing to panel discussions on Tuesday’s edition of ‘Kokrokoo’, Kweku Baako said the respondents were just misdirecting proceedings and so it was good and appropriate that the judges redirected them back to KPMG.
“What they were doing was misdirection and the court directed them to the appropriate place. The whole thing didn’t make sense. It was bare-faced mischief packaged in a very nice way before a court. They claim they realized the addition of boxes during an inventory where KPMG was part but it turns out that KPMG says they were not part of any inventory exercise and so the question is when, where, how and by whom was the inventory taken. These are very fundamental questions that we should ask. It raises so many issues and it borders on their own integrity and credibility” he said curtly.
He indicated that if the respondents went to the strong room by themselves without the other party’s; including the referee’s involvement; then they have breached the court’s security and confidentiality and that they were up to some mischief.
“This thing could have thrown the whole process into disarray. If the court was not wise to redirect them back to KPMG, it could have created a big problem. We were being invited into the realm of absurdity, driven by malice and mischief all along the line in the name of law, good articulation, brilliant delivery, body language…” he added.