NPP Angry With Bawumia





The Daily Post’s sources within the New Patriotic Party (NPP) have revealed how anger and rage are simmering against their defeated Vice-presidential candidate in the 2012 elections, Dr Mahamudu Bawumia, for using the word “updated” in his evidence-in-chief in court.

Deep Throats within the party have told this paper that the entire legal team was “very upset and disorganised” by Dr Bawumia’s revelation that the document he was using to “refresh” his memory was an “updated” version when he had been coached never to say a thing to that effect.

“It’s absolutely sickening and annoying for him to use the word “updated” and even repeated it several times over; we could not but find means of wriggling ourselves out the legal maze Dr Bawumia had entangled us with,” a source within the NPP legal team revealed.

On day three of the substantive hearing in which three NPP leaders are challenging the verdict of the 2012 general elections, the witness-in-chief of the petitioners, Dr Bawumia admitted to making “mistakes” in some of the documents the NPP had tended in evidence.

Mr Tony Lithur, lead counsel for the first respondent, President John Mahama revealed that Dr Bawumia had “deliberately repeated polling stations to shore up figures” to buttress his claims and the claim by the two other petitioners that the second respondent, which is the Electoral Commissioner erred in declaring John Mahama winner of the 2012 polls.

After submitting and pointing out the inaccuracies in about 37 pink sheets, Mr Lithur pointed out, “I suggest to you that you deliberately duplicated these pink sheets to deceive the courts.”

Dr Bawumia, apparently a novice to court proceedings and traditions also retorted, “I suggest to you that I did not deceive the court,” an answer which drew prolonged and loud laughter from the those in the court who were latter warned by one of the judges to be civil or be thrown out of the courtroom.

Dr Bawumia confirmed that even though the exhibit numbers were different for the same polling station as pointed out by the counsel for the first respondent, figures for each polling station were only entered once in his analysis.

He said the different exhibit numbers came about as a result of manual recording and electronic recording, an admission to which Mr Lithur retorted, “Oh, so you also make mistakes?” which again drew some laughter from the gallery and other lawyers in the courtroom.

Lithur repetitively and laboriously named 38 of the various polling stations named by the petitioners and which had the deficit of double exhibit numbers and pointed out to the witness and to the court what he claims were a deliberate scheme of duplication.

In a post-court interview with the media, Nana Ato Dadzie, a member of the legal team of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) suggested that the principal witness, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia and the Petitioner’s legal team were “not sure of what they are fighting for.”

He accused the New Patriotic Party’s legal team of varying the number of reported irregularities on day three of the substantive hearing.

“They again tried to reduce their own figures. They had started with 4,709 irregularities. They came to 11,960 earlier this week. Counsel indicated they have dropped to 11,832 and later on to 11,138. They are not too sure of what they are fighting over”, Ato Dadzie mocked.


Comments