Dismiss John Mahama’s Application To Re-Open Case -Jean Mensa To Supreme Court
The Chair of the Electoral Commission, Ghana EC, Jean Adukwei Mensa, has sworn an affidavit and praying the Supreme Court to dismiss a fresh application filed by petitioner in the election petition case John Dramani Mahama to reopen the case. According to Mrs Mensa, the application is not warranted by any rule of law or procedure and the same should be dismissed by this
Honourable Court. She indicated that John Mahama’s application is creating the erroneous impression that this application is made at my behest. Chairperson of the Commission explained that at no time had she informed the petitioner nor his lawyers of her desire to testify in the case. Lawyers of Mahama on Thursday, February 11 declared their intention to re-open the case
in order to subpoena Mrs Jean Mensa as the Returning Officer of last year’s presidential elections to testify. It followed the unanimous dismissal of an earlier application to force witnesses of both respondents EC and Nana Akufo Addo to appear in the witness box. The respondents had closed their case by voting not to present their witnesses in court. But the petitioner filed
the application to get the Chair of the EC, in particular, to make an appearance in the interest of the public. In her affidavit, calling for the dismissal of the petitioner’s application, Mrs Jean Mensa stated, I believe that there are more convenient fora for ventilating the so-called public interest issues and further that this should not form the basis of the Petitioner re-opening his case in a Presidential Elections Petition in Court. She expressed
surprise how the petitioner, after closing his case on his own volition, will come back again to request that the case be re-open. I am advised that even if this Court grants leave for the Petitioner to reopen its case; it ought not cause a subpoena to be issued against me because a subpoena is issued with coercive effect. The Honourable Court, having held that I rightly exercised the option of my right not to testify would be overriding its earlier decision to order i be compelled to testify.