STATEMENT: Supreme Court Won’t Tolerate Tony Lithur’s Cross-Examination Method

The President of the presidential election petition panel, William Atuguba JSC, has directed that the court will no longer accept the cross examination method of Tony Lithur, lawyer for John Mahama, stating emphatically that Mr Lithur should list all the pinksheets he has issues with and say their effect on the numbers and this must be done “forthwith” before Monday.

A letter dated 19th April 2013, titled “The mode of continuation of cross-examination of 2nd Petitioner on pink sheets” and signed by Justice William Atuguba, himself, was sent to all parties by in the Supreme Court case, where the petitioners are challenging the outcome of the 2012 elections.

Most observers watching the election petition expressed worry about Mr Lithur’s cross-examination of Dr Mahamudu Bawumia, after he spent 5 hours pulling out 38 pinksheets in his attempt to prove that Dr Bawumia’s evidence contained duplicate pinksheets.

Observers were of the opinion that Mr Lithur was clearly attempting to ensure a non-expeditious determination of the case, a clear violation of CI 74.

Below is a reproduction of Justice William Atuguba’s letter:

WRIT J1/6/2013

1. NANA ADDO DANKWA AKUFO-ADDO
2. DR MAHAMUDU BAWUMIA
3. JAKE O OBETSEBI LAMPTEY
PETITIONERS

VRS

1. JOHN DRAMANI MAHAMA
2. THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION
3. NDC
RESPONDENTS

MODE OF CONTINUATION OF CROSS-EXAMINATION OF 2ND PETITIONER ON PINK SHEETS

In order to expedite the hearing of the petition, the panel hereby directs that the cross-examination on the pink sheets be continued as follows:

1. Counsel for the 1st Respondent do list out the residue of the pink sheets in the manner here to be identified by him in his cross-examination of the 2nd petitioner which he claims were duplicated, in their mode and manner of generation and extent of their user by the petitioners for the purposes of proof of their petition.

2. The said list should be electronically served forthwith by counsel for the 1st respondent on all other parties.

3. At the resumed sitting on Monday, 22/04/2013 counsel for the 1st respondent may put the said list by way of further cross-examination to the 2nd petitioner for his response.

4. The said list can then be tended in evidence.

5. Counsel for the 1st respondent or any other party may bring along with him his or their copies of the pink sheets.

W. A. ATUGUBA
PRESIDING JUDGE

Comments