Monday, 08 March

Election Petiton: Mahama’s review application emotional, abuse of court processes – Akoto Ampaw

Politics
Mr Akoto Ampaw

The lead counsel for the second respondent in the ongoing election petition, Mr Akoto Ampaw, has described the application for review filed by the petitioner, Mr John Dramani Mahama, as an abuse of the court processes.

Mr Ampaw has, therefore, asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the former President’s review application.

He told the court on Thursday, 18 February 2021 that: “We are opposed to the application for a review and we rely on our affidavit in opposition and statement of case filed on the 17th of February”.

“My Lords, it is our respectful view that this application does not appropriately invoke the special review jurisdiction of the court under Article 133 as well as Rule 54 of CI 16.”

According to Mr Ampaw, the petitioner has become emotional as a result of the court’s decision against his prayer to have the Bench compel Electoral Commission Chair Mrs Jean Mensa to testify.

Mr Ampaw said: “My Lords, we are submitting to this honourable court that this application is a classic case of an aggrieved party, who has become emotional by the decision of the court, who seeks to re-argue his case through the backdoor of an apparent review application, which it is not”.

“This is an abuse of court process.”

He further noted that the review for application does not satisfy the conditions for one.

“My lords, I believe, and we submit that this application is completely unmeritorious and does not satisfy the very strict conditions for review laid out in Article 133 and rule 54 of this court.”

He added: “We, accordingly pray that this application be dismissed as an abuse of court processes and even though we are all aware that in constitutional matters like this, no cost is awarded, but I think this is a proper occasion for a cost to be awarded.”

The Supreme Court had ruled on Thursday, 11 February that Mrs Jean Mensa could not be compelled to testify or be cross-examined in the ongoing case.  

It, therefore, dismissed the petitioner’s application for re-opening of the case to subpoena the EC Chair to testify.

 

Source: classfmonline.com