A private legal practitioner, Benjamin Techie Antiedu has suggested lawyers do not have to build their case on in the court through witnesses of their opponents.

The lawyer and author explained that you would have to build your own case when you go to court.

He was commenting on the decision taken by the 1st and 2nd respondents not to present their witnesses in the witness box to be cross-examined.

He said the petitioner and his lawyers should be happy that the respondents have refused to put their witnesses forward for cross-examination.

He told Kwabena Agyapong on Frontline on Rainbow Radio 87.5Fm that the only remedy for the petitioner should the ruling on the refusal to cross-examine go in favour of the respondents, they can only appeal.

Lawyer for the Electoral Commission (EC), Justin Amenuvor on Monday, February 8 told the panel hearing the election petition that it will not put its witness, Jean Mensa in the witness box.

This was after the petitioner told the court it has closed its case.

Mr Amenuvor told the court that given the evidence of the petitioner’s witnesses who were cross-examined in the case, they do not want to lead any further evidence.



“Given the evidence of the petitioner’s witnesses under cross-examination so far, of those witnesses, speaking for the 1st respondent, it is the 1st respondent’s case that we do not wish to lead any further evidence and therefore we are praying that this matter proceeds under Order 36 Rule 43 and CI 87 rule 3 (e) 5, we hereby and on that basis close our case.”

But lead counsel for the petitioner, Tsatsu Tsikata, however, objected to the move by the lawyer for the 1st Respondent.

Lawyer Antiedu stated that lawyers should always build their own case when they go to court and not depend on the witnesses of the other side.

He added that although there would be a court of public opinion on the refusal of the EC to mount the witness box, there could be other avenues for us to interrogate the work of the EC.

Parliament and other civil society groups, he said, could also deal with the matter after the case is over.

Meanwhile, he has described some outcomes from the cross-examination of Rojo Mettle-Nunoo as unhealthy.

To him, there were some below-the-belt moments during the cross-examination and felt it could have been prevented.