Member of the petitioner’s communication team in the ongoing election petition, Lawyer Dominic Akuritinga Ayine has described the ruling by the Supreme Court against an application of the petitioner as equivalent to an agenda to rule the entire case against the petitioner.
The Seven Member panel of the Supreme Court today ruled against the petitioner’s application to reopen the case in order to file a subpoena on the Electoral Commissioner, Madam Jean Adukwei Mensa.
The application comes after the electoral commission which is the first respondent in the petition, indicated that it was no longer going to put a witness which would essentially be the commissioner in the witness box for oral testimony and cross-examination.
The respondent’s lawyers who had then closed their case fell on the court to compel the EC head to mount the witness box but were turned down by the court.
They subsequently filed an application to reopen their case to be able to serve a subpoena on the Commissioner.
However, in the court’s ruling today, Tuesday, February 16, 2021, it said it was not going to permit the petitioner, Mr. John Dramani Mahama to re-open his case and file a subpoena on the EC boss.
Reacting to the ruling, Mr Ayine said the position by the court could be measured as the court having already taken a predetermined position on the election petition itself.
“For the court to rule against our plea to subpoena Jean Adukwei Mensa is tantamount to a predetermined agenda to rule the case against the petitioner,” he stated.
Already Mr Dominic Ayine has been reprimanded by the head of the Supreme Court Panel, Chief Justice Anin Yeboah over what he said was disrespectful body language exhibited towards the bench.