John Mahama
Former President John Dramani Mahama has filed an application for stay of proceedings praying the Supreme Court to stay the proceedings of the ongoing election petition challenging the 2020 Presidential election.
The application is asking the court to put the main trial on hold until it hears and determines his application for review seeking to overturn the court’s dismissal of another application which sought leave to serve 12 interrogatories on the Electoral Commission (EC).
Lawyers for the President had filed an application for interrogatories seeking leave of the highest court to serve some 12 questions on the Electoral Commission regarding the transfer of votes from the district and regional offices of the EC to its Headquarters.
Mr. Mahama wanted the EC to answer among others, questions relating to the processes involved in the transmission of results from the constituencies to the regional offices of the EC.
He was also seeking to solicit responses on whether or not the National Communications Authority (NCA) in any way facilitated the transmission of results from the various centres to the national Headquarters of the EC.
But a seven-member panel of the court presided over by the Chief Justice, Kwasi Anin-Yeboah, in a unanimous decision, dismissed the application as not establishing relevance for the grant of such application.
Not satisfied, he filed an application for review which has been scheduled for January 28, 2021.
The Supreme Court has ordered the parties in the matter to file their witness statements and exhibits if any.
But the former president has filed an application praying the Apex Court to stay its proceedings and determine the review application first.
Mr. Mahama’s application for stay of proceedings is alleging that the continuation of the hearing of the petition before the review application is heard “would cause irreparable harm to the conduct of our case, since I would have been denied the benefit of normal pre-trial processes.”
In an affidavit deposed to by Mr. Mahama, he claims that the application for review is based on certain fundamental errors of law made by the court in its ruling, leading to miscarriage of justice.
“At the hearing of this application (stay), counsel will crave the indulgence of the court to refer to the statement of case in support of the application for review, particularly to show that there are indeed serious matters of law that are to be determined in this review application, I am likely to succeed as the ruling of the court is manifestly in error”, he argues.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Instagram
Google+
YouTube
LinkedIn
RSS