Election petition - Supreme Court
Election Petition: Court grants Mahama’s motion to amend errors

The lawyers for the 2020 National Democratic Congress presidential candidate, John Dramani Mahama, have filed an application for review of the Supreme Court’s ruling that prevented him from reopening his case.

Mr Mahama, who is the petitioner, had urged the court to grant his request saying he intends to subpoena the Electoral Commission (EC) Chairperson, Mrs Jean Mensa to testify in the ongoing election petition.

Lead counsel for Mr Mahama, Tsatsu Tsikata, who argued the case, said they were taken by surprise when the EC Chairperson opted not to testify after submitting a witness statement, hence the decision to reopen the case and ask for a subpoena.

He insisted that there are also allegations that came up during the cross-examination of their witnesses and these are matters only the EC Chairperson could speak to.


Dismissing the application, the seven-member panel of judges maintained that the petitioner had not indicated how the evidence he intends to solicit from the EC Chairperson will help to determine the case.

Reading the ruling, Chief Justice Kwasi Anin Yeboah emphasised that the success of the petitioner’s case is dependent on his evidence and therefore the decision to close his case was not based on the fact that Mrs Mensa had filed a witness statement and was to testify.

He also stated that the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioner are the same as those raised in the objection to the 1st Respondent’s decision not to call a witness.

The Chief Justice concluded by explaining that the EC Chairperson is not on trial, hence she cannot be asked to vindicate herself.

But in new documents sighted by MyJoyOnline.com, Mr Mahama says the apex court made fundamental errors of law, including the ruling being per incuriam of constitutional provisions, statutes, and previous decisions of the Supreme Court.

“Among these errors, I am advised by counsel and verily believe, is an error whereby the court subordinates a provision in the Evidence Act to a rule in subsidiary legislation by the Rules of Court Committee,” point five of the application noted.

This new motion follows two others filed by the petitioner after the dismissal of his leave seeking to reopen the case.

The two motions included a review of the ruling by the court on February 11, that the EC Chair cannot be compelled to mount the witness box and a stay of proceedings pending the hearing of the review application.

On Thursday, February 18, 2021, the apex court dismissed the review application and described the second motion as moot.