Respondents case was insipid and wishy-washy – Marietta Brew Appiah - Dateline Africa
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-20625,single-format-standard,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,qode-theme-ver-13.3,qode-theme-bridge,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-6.0.5,vc_responsive

Respondents case was insipid and wishy-washy – Marietta Brew Appiah

Respondents case was insipid and wishy-washy – Marietta Brew Appiah

11 Feb,2021

Spokesperson for the petitioner, Marietta Brew Oppong-Appiah has stated that the respondents in the ongoing 2020 election petition have so far failed to meet expectations in terms of arguing their case in court.
According to Madam Marietta, the respondents’ case during the last hearing was “insipid and wishy-washy.”
Her comment follows the dismissal of an application filed by the petitioner for the EC Chair to mount the witness box for cross-ex

The Supreme Court on Thursday, in a unanimous decision upheld the application by the 1st and 2nd Respondents not to call any witnesses in the ongoing election petition hearing.
The Court explained that the depositions in affidavits with regards to the interrogatories do not mean the witness can be compelled.
The Court added that no provision in the constitution or statute has been pointed out to show the EC chairperson can be subjected to different rules contrary to established rules of procedure and settled practice.
Speaking at a press brief after Thursday’s hearing, however, the former Attorney-General indicated that although the ruling did not go in the petitioner’s favour, they had presented “superior arguments” in court.

She added that the petitioner and his legal team will proceed to subpoena the Electoral Commission Chair to compel her to mount the witness box and testify.
“On Monday you heard the superior compelling arguments by Mr Tsikata and of course you heard the wishy-washy insipid arguments by the respondents,” she said.

She further explained that “the petitioner’s point was that under the specific rule, Order 36, they had elected to adduce evidence in court and therefore, it was no longer open to them to tell the court that they were not going to give evidence.
“Nevertheless, the court has ruled in favor of the respondents saying that they do not agree with us that even though the EC is a constitutional body. The same principles that are applicable to ordinary people should be applicable to the Electoral Commission and therefore, they were upholding the (respondents) request not to mount the witness box,” she added.
Meanwhile the Court has ordered all parties to file their closing addresses by February 17, 2021.

No Comments

Post A Comment