The Electoral Commission (EC) has opposed a motion on notice for review in respect of a dismissed application for interrogatories.
The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the application for interrogatories saying interrogatories should be based on relevance.
The Petitioner, John Dramani Mahama in the December 7 Presidential Election Petition case has however filed a review of the dismissed application for interrogatories.
Mr Mahama held that the interrogatories would narrow down to the issues set out for trial. The EC in its affidavit in opposition sworn by Mrs Jean Mensa, Chairperson of the Commission noted that the motion on notice for review did not show any exceptional circumstance necessitating the application for review.
“Besides, the application has not raised any specific miscarriage of Justice suffered by virtue of the decision of the court to refuse the application for interrogatories.”
The EC says the decision by the Court to deny the application for interrogators was made by the court in accordance with the dictates imposed by CI 99 of 2016 and the court ought not to change its compliance with statute.
“I believe the application for review will not serve the interest of Justice but rather instruct the timely completion of the applicant’s (Mr Mahama) own case in court in accordance of CI 99.
The EC said the applicant (Mr Mahama) would not suffer any injury to his rights if the court dismissed the review application as he has the opportunity to solicit the answers he seeks now during cross-examination if he so wished, adding that “unless he is actually fishing and/or trying to delay the trial”.
“I believe there are no exceptional circumstance or legal basis for that to warrant the intervention of this honourable court in this application for review,” the EC argued.
Meanwhile, the EC has filed another motion for abridgement of time for the application for review. The EC want the Supreme Court to hear the application for review on January 26 instead of January 28, this year.
The Commission says the abridgement of time was necessary for a speedy determination for the motion.
“I pray that in the interest of Justice and speedy determination of this matter and in line with timelines in CI 99 be abridged to January 26 subject to the convenience of the court”.