Supreme Cout dismisses Tsatsu’s application to cross-examine more witnesses

The panel of judges hearing the election petition has dismissed a motion filed by the lawyer for the third respondent, where he was seeking to cross-examine more witnesses who had testified for the petitioners via affidavit.

Lawyer for the third respondent filed the motion seeking to cross-examine the Member of Parliament for Tano North, Freda Prempeh, MP for Berekum, East Dr. Kwabena Twum Nuamah and a polling station officer at Savelugu in the Northern Region.

During the hearing on Thursday, Mr. Tsikata said “the truth of the matters testified to by the named witnesses in the affidavit, is an important basis upon which to call for their cross-examination and that the motion to oppose filed by the petitioners does not indicate the unavailability of the named witnesses to appear.”

According to him, the named individuals made “claims of personal knowledge of events at named polling stations which ought to be tested and that the processes of the court will be well-served by obtaining evidence from these witnesses.”

Mr. Tsikata also said the opposition is strange because it is based on the responses of the second respondent in their (petitioners) affidavit which has nothing to do with the first and second respondents.

On his part, lawyer for the petitioners, Philip Addison opposed the motion to cross-examine Twum Nuamah, Freda Prempeh, Eugene Sackey and Peter Wuni saying, “their evidence was clear and the matters regarding them were no longer in controversy as indicated in the affidavit deposed to by the second respondent” adding that Abdulai Abdul Hamid and Fuseni Safianu could be cross-examined

Dismissing the motion, the president of the panel, Justice William Atuguba said “ various types of evidence has made on this matter, both by the evidence of the second petitioner in the ensuing cross-examination on the pink sheets and the affidavits filed by the parties. We think that these and any further evidence will suffice to enable us assess the various factual matters involved without the protraction involved in the cross-examination of the witness discovered in this application.”

 

Source: Citifmonline