{"id":594735,"date":"2019-02-26T20:07:40","date_gmt":"2019-02-26T20:07:40","guid":{"rendered":"

Dominic Ayine [L] conferring with his client Sam George during the Commission hearing<\/p>

\n\n\n

A former Deputy Attorney-General has criticised Justice Emile Sh"},"modified":"2019-02-26T20:07:40","modified_gmt":"2019-02-26T20:07:40","slug":"ayine-criticises-ruling-on-ndc-politicians-cross-examination-request","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ghanamma.com\/2019\/02\/26\/ayine-criticises-ruling-on-ndc-politicians-cross-examination-request\/","title":{"rendered":"Ayine criticises ruling on NDC politicians cross-examination request"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

Dominic Ayine [L] conferring with his client Sam George during the Commission hearing<\/p>\n

\n<\/p>\n

A former Deputy Attorney-General has criticised Justice Emile Short’s ruling declining a request by some NDC politicians to cross-examine witnesses who testified before the Commission of Inquiry investigating the Ayawaso West Wuogon by-election violence.<\/p>\n

Dr. Dominic Ayine,\u00a0counsel for two witnesses who are opposition politicians,\u00a0maintained the rules of court contemplates situations where any witness believing a testimony impugns his image, would want to cross-examine another.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\u201cThe right to cross-examine one\u2019s accuser with facts that impugn the integrity of their evidence is a fundamental right recognised by not only the Evidence Act but also the Constitution of Ghana\u201d, he pointed out on Joy FM.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

The Emile Short Commission had ruled during Tuesday\u2019s hearing, the commission is not a court.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Photo: Emile Short is chair of a three-member Commission of Inquiry<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n

The Chairman of the Commission held the rules allow cross-examination only if the witness is a subject of the Commission of Inquiry – the lawyer\u2019s clients, NDC MP Sam George and NDC parliamentary candidate Delali Brempong are not.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

The Short Commission argued to allow cross-examination could open the floodgates for other witnesses and fundamentally disrupt its work.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

If a witness has questions for another witness, it should be routed through counsel for the Commission who under the rules is allowed to re-examine the witness, Emile Short read the judgment.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

But counsel for the two NDC politicians in an interview on Joy FM argued his clients qualify as\u00a0subjects of the inquiry as provided in Article 282 (1) of the 1992 Constitution which states;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cAny person whose conduct is the subject of inquiry by a commission of inquiry, or who may, in any way be implicated or concerned in the matter under inquiry, is entitled to be represented by a lawyer at the inquiry\u2026\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The counsel for the two NDC politicians argued that \u201cby what stretch of interpretation would you say Sam George is not implicated or in someway concerned with the matters\u2026before the Commission?\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cOr in the case of Delali Brempong, that he is not concerned with or implicated?\u201d he wanted to know.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\"Delali<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Photo: Delali Brempong contested the Ayawaso-West Wuogon by-election on the ticket of the opposition National Democratic Congress<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n

Picking an example, he explained Delali Brempong who was the NDC parliamentary candidate in the Ayawaso West Wuogon by-election has been accused of keeping weapons in his house ahead of the polls held January 31, 2019.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThere is no way by which the evidence that was given\u2026 regarding the existence of arms can be impeached. The only mechanism provided by law is cross-examination\u201d.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

He said he \u201cfundamentally\u201d disagreed with Emile Short\u2019s ruling which leaves the determination of the credibility of a testimony to the Commission.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Dominic Ayine\u00a0rejected concerns by the Commission that allowing the cross-examination could open the floodgates.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

The alternative offered to them to submit questions to counsel for the Commission for re-examination of a witness undermines the floodgate argument, he insisted.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

If a witness can submit questions which lead\u00a0to recalling witnesses, \u201cother persons who have the same concern will also exercise the same right and they will be recalling witnesses ad infinitum.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

The counsel for the two said like the court, there are procedures in law by which cross-examination requests are limited.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

He said since the Commission is an \u201cinferior administrative tribunal\u201d, it is possible, his client may proceed to the High Court to challenge the ruling.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n