Wednesday, February 27, 2013
NDC demands further particulars from petitioners
February 2, 2013 (Page 3 Lead) THE National Democratic Congress (NDC), is requesting the petitioners challenging the declaration of President John Dramani Mahama, as the winner of the 2012 presidential elections to furnish it with “better and further particulars” on allegations of irregularities during the elections. The NDC, which was allowed to join the petition on January 22, 2013 as the third respondent, is demanding “particulars of the instances where votes earned by the first petitioner were unlawfully reduced whilst at the same time votes of the first respondent were illegally padded.” Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, the presidential candidate of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), in the December 2012 elections, is the first petitioner in the petition which is seeking to annul votes declared in 11,916 polling stations, due to alleged “widespread and gross irregularities.” President Mahama is the first respondent while the Electoral Commission (EC), which organized the election, is the second respondent. The other petitioners are Nana Akufo-Addo’s running mate, Dr Mahamadu Bawumia and the Chairman of the NPP, Mr Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey,. In an original petition dated, December 28, 2013, the three are praying the court to annul votes cast in 4,709 polling stations due to widespread irregularities. However, the NDC filed the application for further and better particulars under Rule 69 A (4) of the Supreme Court Amendment Rules, 2012, (C.I. 74) which allows respondents in a case to file for further and better particulars. In a motion filed on behalf of the NDC by its solicitors, the Law Trust Company, the NDC is praying the court to order the petitioners to provide it with particulars of the deliberate, well-calculated and executed ploy or a contrivance on the part of the respondents. They are also claiming particulars of claims by the petitioners that the results declared by the EC in favour of President Mahama were far in excess of the valid votes cast in his (President’s) favour. The party is also requesting for particulars of the numbers of votes deducted by petitioners from the respective votes declared in favour of the respective candidates as well as particulars on the names and codes of polling stations where each of the irregularities allegedly occurred. The motion is expected to be moved on February 5, 2013. In an amended petition, dated January 31, 2013, the petitioners are praying the court to annul 4,670,504 valid votes cast during the election at 11,916 polling stations where alleged irregularities were recorded. The petitioners are also seeking to introduce the claim that there were 28 locations where elections took place which according to them, were not part of the 26,002 polling stations created by the EC. The Supreme Court is expected to hear the motion to amend the petition on February 5, 2013. Writer's e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.