The alleged discovery of a box of pink sheets that was supposedly in the possession of Justice William Atuguba and was meant to serve as a control measure by auditing firm, KPMG in the audit of pink sheet exhibits in the ongoing hearing of the election petition at the Supreme Court has been described as a "climax to the disgrace of the respondents". According to John Boadu, a Deputy Director of Communications of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and Mohammed Atik, a member of the People’s National Convention (PNC), the new development was mind-boggling and a “disgrace’ to the respondents." Last week sections of the media reported that, KPMG's auditing of pink sheets in the custody of Justice William Atuguba, president of the nine-member panel of judges sitting on the landmark election petition hearing, had yielded about 9,800 sheets. Earlier it was also reported that over 13,000 pink sheets had been counted at the registry of the Supreme Court. The court had ordered for the pink sheet exhibits to be counted and audited since the respondents in the case had argued that they were not fully served with the number of exhibits the petitioners claimed represented polling stations in contention. They claimed the petitioners had rather “duplicated and triplicated” their exhibits just to make up the numbers. On Tuesday the Daily Guide newspaper reported that one of the boxes containing the pink sheets in Justice Atuguba’s custody was recovered after it allegedly went missing. A member of the respondents’ legal team, Abraham Amaliba however told Accra radio station, Citi FM that as far as they (respondents) were concerned, none of the boxes containing the pink sheets of Justice Atuguba was missing. But speaking on Oman FM, Atik Mohammed and John Boadu argued that whether or not there was a shortfall in Justice Atuguba’s pink sheets shouldn’t be a bother to the petitioners. “They (petitioners) filed and there was documentation to that effect so for them they don’t have a problem”. They argued that the way the pink sheets issue has been handled was an ample example of how things are sometimes badly handled in the country. John Boadu on his part said it was not even necessary for the court to have agreed for Justice Atuguba’s copy of exhibits to be counted especially where counsel for the third respondents, Mr. Tsatsu Tsikata had suggested in open court that there could be some criminal angles to the pink sheet issues. He described the whole incident of pink sheet shortfalls as “much ado about nothing and wasting of everybody’s time”. On his part, Atik Mohammed said Mr Tsatsu Tskata, lawyer for the National Democratic Congress “is doing more propaganda than law in court”. He said Tsatsu claims the KPMG report would vindicate their position and has been telling foot-soldiers that the petitioners did not file enough pink sheets and rather duplicated and triplicated what they filed. “I want to hear what he (Tsatsu) will say again,” Atik said, and added that the new development was a "climax to the disgrace of the respondents". “Why are they not going by the CD-rom? The further and better particulars, they told you all the constituencies to be used. All this is just a delay of the process,” he said. He maintained that the behaviour of the Electoral Commission’s lawyer, Mr James Quashie-Idun was even more mind-boggling. He said Mr Quashie-Idun claimed he had been fully served with pink sheets but the moment Tsatsu Tsikata and Tony Lithur said they were not fully served, he also joined the fray. “As for Quashie-Idun, I don’t understand him. I don’t know if there is a whip system in the court. But it seems there isn’t anything like that but he is allowing it to be introduced”. “The first day, he behaved himself but the second day it was as if the others had told him to object to everything. Everything you say you are harassing the witness”. Atik Mohammed said Mr Quashie-Idun’s objections became rampant such that he raised objections even before questions were asked or waited till the witness was in the middle of the answer. “God has exposed them. They claimed not to have been fully served”, he said.