National Chairman of the main opposition party, NDC, has reiterated that his party never lost the 2020 presidential elections which was characterised by some misunderstanding and the party filed a suit at the Supreme Court to discredit the election outcome.

Samuel Ofosu-Ampofo’s assertion came after the opposition party went into a three-day retreat in the Volta Region to review the outcome of the 2020 elections and the impact it will have on the party in their quest to win the 2024 elections.

“We never lost the election because based on our facts and all the infractions we adopted, we told you that nobody passed the 50% mark in that election,” Ofosu-Ampofo said on Asempa FM monitored by GhanaWeb.

When asked why their star witness in the election petition was not able to prove that nobody crossed the 50% plus one threshold as prescribed by the Constitution, the NDC National Chairman said:

“If the opportunity was given for us to prove it, we could have proved it but the opportunity was not given; interrogatories were not allowed, questions were not answered. The person who was responsible to answer those questions was left off the hook, so, you can’t blame us for that.”

Ofosu-Ampofo added that the person who was the custodian of the results run away from answering questions regarding the elections and the results she had on the elections she proudly organized.

About the Election Petition

The Supreme Court on Thursday, March 4, passed a verdict on the 2020 election petition brought before it by the disgruntled flagbearer of the NDC, John Dramani Mahama.

The seven-member panel which had Chief Justice Kwasi Anin-Yeboah presiding rejected Mahama’s application for a rerun in unison.

Of the five reliefs which were being sought by the petitioner, the court unanimously granted none of them.

Despite their position that the petitioner’s case had a ‘reasonable cause of action’, they contend that he did not adduce enough evidence to support his claims.

The court observed in its ruling that the petitioner’s case stood on the oral error committed by the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission who was the first respondent.

The justices stated in the ruling that allegations of vote padding were not backed with tangible evidence by the petitioner.

It, therefore, concluded that it had no justification to grant his request for a rerun of the polls.