A witness for the petitioners in the ongoing electoral petition hearing, Johnson Asiedu Nketia, has admitted to seeing his own evidence in court for the first time during cross-examination, Monday.

The NDC General Secretary told the Supreme Court that he knows only of the manual version of the same documents on the pen drive but not the soft copy as showed by lawyer for the Second Respondent, Akoto Ampaw.

“No, I haven’t looked at the pen drive. It is my first time of seeing it. I haven’t seen the pen drive and its content till today,” he said.

This was after the court allowed for the content of the pen drive to be displaced to the witness for cross-examination.

The lead counsel for Akufo-Addo, put it before the witness that in a pen drive attached to his witness statement and transcribed in Exhibit F showed columns that indicate vote padding for both the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC).

Mr Nketia was unable to admit or deny the question posed to him by Mr Ampaw because he was not acquainted with the evidence in question.

“I honestly told you that I have not seen the electronic copy. And from where I sit, I don’t see padded for the NPP or padded for the NDC on the screen,” he added.

In Exhibit F of the witness statement presented to the apex court, Mr Asiedu Nketia accused the First Respondent, the Electoral Commissioner of vote padding in favour of President Akufo-Addo.

According to Mr Asiedu Nketia, the hasty process and short timeline the court ordered for the submission of the petitioner’s witness statement deprived him of time to be abreast with contents on the pen drive.

Again, the NDC General Secretary indicated to the court that the evidence presented to court was gathered by the party’s elections and legal directorate.

Meanwhile, member of Akufo-Addo’s legal team, Oppong Nkrumah who spoke to the press after the hearing said the inconsistencies presented by the petitioner and his witness have exposed their bad faith against the EC Chair.

“What we also found interesting were the attempts to shield the witness by his counsel to the extent that even materials they had tendered in, there was an attempt to ensure he wasn’t questioned on it,” he said.

But a member of the legal team for the petitioner, Marietta Brew Appiah-Oppong said they are satisfied with the testimony given by the General Secretary.

“In fact, there is nothing in what he said that can undermine our case. The information on the pen drive was printed for the General Secretary so he didn’t see the pen drive. It wasn’t that he didn’t know what was in the folders,” she said.