Editor of the New Crusading Guide newspaper, Abdul Malik Kwaku Baako Jnr, says allegations by Mr Tsatsu Tsikata and Tony Lithur on Tuesday that boxes containing pink sheets set to be audited by KPMG in the ongoing election petition was a lie.

Counsel for the third Respondent, Tsatsu Tsikata, on Tuesday, complained to the Supreme Court that seven boxes had been added to the “original” number of 24 boxes to be counted by KPMG per orders of Justice Atuguba, President of the Panel of Judges.

According to Mr Tsikata, as of last Thursday of the previous week, when preparations were done, 24 boxes were confirmed by their representatives, and alleged that the new development was “a matter of criminality”.

Speaking on Peace FM's Kokrokoo Wednesday, Kwaku Baako said to the best of his knowledge the allegation that there was an inventory-taken of boxes containing pink sheets was totally false.

According to him, the Respondents’ allegations “borders on their own credibility and integrity” in the arguments they are making in ongoing petition at the Supreme Court.

KPMG, the auditing firm selected to referee the auditing of the pink sheets has come out to say they did not take part in any counting of boxes prior to the commencement of the auditing.

“I am desisting to say that it was a bloody lie. I would say they peddled an obvious untruth…how did they arrive at the figure?” Baako demanded.

He said the nature of the allegations raises a number of issues such as whether the Respondents counted the boxes without the knowledge of the Petitioners and KPMG.

He said if the Respondents took inventory of the boxes alone, without the knowledge the relevant parties, then it was possible they breached the security and confidentiality of the Court.

The aftermath of the allegations, according to the Editor, shows the Respondents “were up to some mischief”.

In his view, this mischievous allegation had “backfired”.

He indicated that the oral application by Mr Tsatsu Tsikata for tighter controls in the auditing of pink sheets was a strategy to stall the hearing and discredit the Court's registry.

The Court, however, ruled that the Respondents can go back to the referee, KPMG, to formally lodge a complaint about their suspicion, which Mr Atuguba said would be incorporated into the report of KPMG.