Lead Counsel for petitioner John Dramani Mahama, Tsatsu Tsikata quizzed why the Supreme Court would refuse to grant their request for interrogatories on grounds that they were irrelevant and yet state that these same questions could be asked during cross-examinations.
He made the pronouncement when he was arguing for their application for review for the case of interrogatories which was dismissed by the court a few weeks ago, to be granted.
The Apex Court on January 19, 2021, dismissed the application by the petitioner.
Former President John Mahama was seeking permission to elicit answers to some 12 interrogatories from the Electoral Commission.
The petitioner among other questions were asking the EC to answer if the National Communications Authority (NCA) played any role or facilitated in any way, the transmission of the election results to its headquarters.
On Thursday, January 27, 2021, lawyer Tsikata attention was drawn to the fact that he would get the opportunity to ask these question during cross-examination.
But he responded by saying the judges have said that interrogatories under common law is discretionary, respectfully the interrogatories were not brought to you under common but under rule 22 of CI 47.
“If you say the interrogatories were dismissed because it wasn’t relevant and you say it can be asked during cross-examination, respectfully how can irrelevant questions be accepted during cross-examination?”
Source: RainbowRadio
This website uses cookies.
Read More