A spokesperson for the Petitioner in the ongoing Election Petition at the Supreme Court has said that the National Democratic Congress and its flagbearer, John Dramani Mahama, pushed for this case majorly to ensure accountability towards Ghanaians.

Dominic Ayine, who is also a member of Mahama’s legal team, said the case before the court is of public interest and not a private matter.

Lawyer Ayine was speaking on the back of a decision by both respondents in the case, to withdraw their witness statements and close their case after the petitioner had closed his case following the discharge of his 3rd witness.

According to both Lawyers for the Electoral Commissioner and President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, the accounts given by all three witnesses for the Petitioner are enough for the 7-member panel to make a judgment.

Lawyer Justin Amenuvor and Lawyer Akoto Ampaw were of the view that the Petitioner had no case and has failed to execute the burden of proof.

Lead Counsel for the NDC, Tsatsu Tsikata, raised an objection against the application and insisted the 1st Respondent; the EC chair, must enter the witness box and be cross-examined. To Mr Tsikata, Jean Mensa has a constitutional responsibility to testify and tell the public the truth.

Speaking to the media after today’s hearing, the Member of Parliament for Bolgatanga East Constituency said his side, among other things, is dealing with the declaration of the results that is supposed to have reflected the sovereign will of the people of this country.

“The reason why we are insisting that she be allowed to testify is simply because this is not a debt collection case. We are not here dealing with a private matter…We are here dealing with Article 1 of the constitution that says the sovereignty of Ghana resides in the people of Ghana in whose name and for whose welfare the powers of government must be exercised.”

Mr. Ayine added that the EC boss must let the public in on how she arrived at the conclusion that Nana Akufo-Addo won the December 7 polls, especially with regards to the different election result declarations made.

“…And that constitutional duty means that she cannot, under any circumstance, be allowed not to account to the people through cross-examination because cross-examination is one of the mechanisms allowed by law for exacting accountability of litigants.”

The hearing has since been adjourned to February 11, 2021.