Dr Dominic Akuritinga Ayine, a spokesperson for former President John Mahama in the Presidential Election Petition, on Tuesday debunked claims that the petition was frivolous and vexatious.

He said the Counsel for the Second Respondent, President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, was creating the impression that the Petitioner had gone to court with a frivolous and empty petition and just seeking to engage in theatricals.

“Former President Mahama is far from being such a person,” he said.

The Supreme Court has ordered the Petitioner to file his witness statements and arguments in response to the preliminary objection raised by the respondents by close of day Wednesday, January 27, 2021.

The seven-member panel said failure to file the witness statements would compel the Court to invoke sanctions of Rule 69 of CI 16, which had been amended by CI 99. Under Rule 69, the Court has the power to dismiss the petition or impose punitive cost against the petitioner.

Dr Ayine said the petition had two purposes - to hold the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission, Mrs Jean Mensa, accountable for a violation of the Constitution and the other was in respect of the mathematics of Article 63 (4) of the Constitution.

The Article requires that for a person to be declared President of Ghana, that person must have obtained more than 50 per cent of the votes cast.

He said their petition was very clear that the President-elect had not obtained 50 plus votes declared by the Chairperson of the EC - the mathematics of Article 69.

On why the Petitioner did not file his witness statements, the spokesperson said he did not file because he had filed an application for stay of proceedings and also application for reviews of the decision of the Court to disallow the administration of the interrogatories.

He said that application was fixed by the Court for hearing on January 28, 2021, therefore, they thought that giving the impact of the interrogatories on their witness statements, if Mrs Mensa answered the questions, it would have bearings on the nature, content and scope of their witness statements.

Dr Ayine said as indicated by Mr Tsatsu Tsikata, lead Counsel for the Petitioner, there was no intention to disobey the court processes.