The Counsel for the petitioner in the Election 2020 Petition trial, Tsatsu Tsikata accused the Supreme Court of harassing Dr Michael Kpessa Whyte, the second witness of the petitioner.

A member of the panel Justice Yaw Apau wanted to find out from the second witness of the petitioner with the question to wit, “You did not help the cause of the Petitioner by leaving the strongroom (national collation centre) of the EC”?

Mr Tsikata vehemently opposed the question to the second witness saying “the Supreme ourt is harassing the witness.”

According to Mr Tiskata, Justice Apau who asked the question, was entitled to his opinion.

Justice Apau, however, asked Tsikata in what way his questioning constituted harassment of the witness.

Justice Apau indicated that they only wanted to have a better understanding of some issues raised in the cross-examination, hence the questions to the witness.

Subsequently, some of of the judges on the panel administered more questions to the witness as to why all the two agents of the Petitioner should leave the EC’s strong room.

The court further wanted to ascertain whether Dr Whyte had any training before taking up the job of being in the EC strong room, and whether they as agents were to take instructions from the EC boss.

Dr Whyte under cross-examination by Counsel for the EC, Justin Amenuvor denied that because Mr Mahama was losing the 2020 election, he and Rojo Mettle-Nunoo, both party agents of the petitioner left the EC’s strong room.

The second witness stated that he and Mr Mettle-Nunoo left the EC strong room because the Chairperson of the EC had “asked” or “instructed” them to do so.

The Apex Court, however, drew the witness' attention to the fact that there is a difference in the use of the words “asked” and “instructed”.

Dr Whyte admitted in court that he did not personally talk to the EC Boss but obtained that information from Mr Mettle-Nunoo.

He, however, added that he had no reason to lie to the court that the EC boss had asked them to consult their flagbearer over the irregularities.

According to the witness they both left the EC strong room because they had some irregularities with some of the results from the regions.

“We never walked or melted away. When we complained about the irregularities, the EC Chairperson asked us to go and see the petitioner and discuss with him the way forward.

“We acted in good faith but we were deceived by the EC boss when she instructed us to leave and as soon as we left, she went upstairs of the EC offices to announce the results of Election 2020,” he said.

Additionally, the witness denied that they only concocted a story about the EC to the petitioner.

The second witness told the court that as of the time he and Mr Mettle-Nunoo were leaving the EC offices, the results at the strong room was not close to the “declaration of the winner of the Elections.”

The witness admitted that on December 9, 2020 he granted an interview to an Accra based radio station in which he alleged there were 390,000 extra ballots from Ashanti Region.

The second witness who said it was his first time in the EC’s strong room, said he recalled that during the interview he told a journalist that some pink sheets from the region had tallied with those in the EC strong room but others did not.

He admitted that Mr Mettle-Nunoo earlier signed some of the results tallied by the EC.

Witness admitted that although Mr Mettle-Nunoo signed for over 12 Regions, he “signed in error.”

Dr Whyte said while leaving the EC strong room, they informed other stakeholders present and that they were leaving and would be returning to the strong room after a meeting with the Petitioner.

The witness said he personally left his car on the EC premises as well as computers and calculators in the strong room.

When asked why they did not call the Petitioner on Phone, the witness said his phone battery was dead.

“When we returned to the EC’s strong room, we found the place deserted,” the second witness told the Supreme Court.

Dr Whyte said they were not interested in the winner of Election 2020 but their interest was in the fact that the “results of the polls were a true reflection of the will of the people.”

In a cross-examination by Mr Akoto Ampaw, counsel for the second respondent (President Nana Akufo Addo), Dr Whyte said he was aware that the EC Chairperson had no power to instruct him and Mr Mettle-Nunoo.

The witness denied that he and Mr Mettle-Nunoo left the strong room on their own volition.

Dr Whyte said the “weight” of the matter to be discussed with the Petitioner required that they both leave the strong room.

Court sitting has been adjourned to February 3 and Dr Whyte was discharged by the court after his cross examination ended.

The petitioner had filed two witness statements of Mr Johnson Asiedu Nketia and Dr Whyte in the Election 2020 Petition trial.

Mr Mahama had proceeded to the Apex Court of the land challenging the validity of the winner of Election 2020. The Petitioner is also accusing the EC of vote padding.