JOHN DRAMANI MAHAMA vs. ELECTORALCOMMISSION AND NANA ADDO DANKWA AKUFO-ADDO [2021]DLSC9955

Date	2021-02-16
Suit No.	WRIT NO. J1/5/2021
Citation No.	[2021]DLSC9955

YEBOAH (CJ) (PRESIDING)

APPAU JSC

MARFUL-SAU JSCC

AMEGATCHER JSC

PROF. KOTEY JSC

OWUSU JSC

TORKORNOO JSC

TSATSU TSIKATA WITH HIM TONY LITHUR FOR THE PETITIONER

JUSTIN AMENUVOR FOR 1ST RESPONDENT WITH HIM A. A. SOMUAH ASAMOAH

AKOTO AMPAW FOR 2ND RESPONDENT WITH HIM FRANK DAVIES

KWAKU ASIRIFI AND YAW OPPONG

[2021]DLSC9955
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
150%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:
Arial;color:#00B0F0;position:relative;top:-.5pt;mso-text-raise:.5pt">JOHN DRAMANI
MAHAMA<o:p></o:p>(PETITIONER)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ELECTORALCOMMISSION<o:p></o:p>(1ST&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>NANA ADDO DANKWA AKUFO-ADDO<o:p></o:p>(2ND RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

WRIT NO. J1/5/2021&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; DATE:&nbsp; 16TH FEBRUARY, 2021<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>TSATSU TSIKATA&nbsp; &nbsp;WITH&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;HIM&nbsp;
&nbsp;TONY&nbsp;
&nbsp;LITHUR&nbsp;
&nbsp;FOR THE PETITIONER<o:p></o:p>JUSTIN
AMENUVOR FOR 1ST RESPONDENT WITH HIM A. A. SOMUAH ASAMOAH<o:p></o:p>AKOTO
AMPAW FOR 2ND RESPONDENT WITH HIM FRANK DAVIES, KWAKU ASIRIFI AND
YAW OPPONG<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

&nbsp;

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;line-height:150%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">YEBOAH
(CJ)&nbsp;
&nbsp;(PRESIDING), APPAU JSC, MARFUL-SAU JSCC, AMEGATCHER JSC, PROF.
KOTEY JSC, OWUSU JSC, TORKORNOO
&nbsp;&nbsp;JSC<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;BY COURT<o:p></o:p>When the Petitioner in this case closed his case
with the testimony of his third and last witness Mr. Robert Joseph Mettle-Nunoo
on the 8th of February 2021, the Court, as our procedure rules on
trials provide, called on the 1st Respondent to open its defence by
the calling of its witness, whose witness statement had already been filed on
the orders of the Court. This witness happened to be the Chairperson of the 1st
Respondent Mrs. Jean Adukwei Mensa. Counsel for the 1st Respondent
told the Court that he had weighed or scrutinized the case of the Petitioner as
presented by his three witnesses and in his view, the Petitioner had not
provided any substantial evidence in proof of his case, for which the 1st
Respondent had to mount the witness box to testify in answer. The 1st
Respondent therefore prayed the Court to determine the petition on the oral
testimonies and data presented by the Petitioner through his witnesses and
decide the main issue at stake, which is; whether or not none of the twelve
(12) Presidential candidates who contested the 7th December, 2020
Presidential elections did obtain more than 50% of the valid votes cast in the
said elections. The 2nd Respondent, who was declared as winner of
the elections by the 1st Respondent, which declaration ignited the
filing of the instant petition, associated himself with the 1st
Respondent on its prayer and told the Court he also did not desire to give any
testimony through his attorney as contemplated.&nbsp;
According to him, the Petitioner did not discharge the burden imposed on
him by law to produce sufficient evidence to buttress his case, so there was no
need for him to say anything in explanation. He supported 1st
Respondent’s prayer that the Court should resolve the petition on Petitioner’s
evidence only, since the burden was on him to prove the reliefs he is seeking.<o:p></o:p>