Advertisement

Atuguba's 'pink sheets' to serve as control in KPMG audit

Mr Justice William Atuguba, Presiding judgeThe Supreme Court yesterday left a sour taste in the mouths of lawyers for the petitioners challenging the legitimacy of President John Dramani Mahama when it ordered that a set of pink sheets in the possession of the President of the court should be used as control in the audit of pink sheets submitted by the petitioners.

To clear all doubts, the court ordered that the set of pink sheets in the possession of Mr Justice William Atuguba should be used by the international audit firm, KPMG, to cross-check an audit of pink sheets following the controversy surrounding the actual number of pink sheets served on respondents.

Lead counsel for the petitioners, Mr Philip Addison, was apparently not amused with the court’s decision because he maintained that although the court had met parties in chambers on May 9, 2013 before ordering the audit of the pink sheets, he did not agree with the court’s suggestion that the president’s pink sheets should be used as control in the audit.

The court agreed that it did not include the aspect of the use of the president’s pink sheets in the audit in its orders in open court but made it clear that all the lawyers in the case had agreed in chambers that the president’s pink sheet be used.

But counsel maintained that as far as he was concerned, KPMG had completed its work because his side had received a draft copy of the report and was billed to submit its response on Monday, June 10, 2013.

That, to him, meant KPMG was not even aware of the supposed court order, but Mr Justice Jones Dotse intervened and reminded counsel that the bench and lawyers in the case were aware of the court’s order.

He, however, admitted the order on the use of the president’s pink sheet was not made in open court and clarified the fact that the court refused a request made in open court by Mr Tsatsu Tsikata, counsel for the National Democratic Congress (NDC), for the addition of two more sets of pink sheets in the possession of two judges in the case. 


Oral Discussion

Mr Addison then informed the court that there had been an oral discussion but he did not recall agreeing to the use of the president’s pink sheets as control in the audit.

His comment drew a quick rebuttal from Mr Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, who did not appear to be amused with Mr Addison’s comment.

Mr Justice Baffoe-Bonnie reminded Mr Addison that there had been nine judges and four lawyers (including Mr Addison himself) at the said meeting and it was, therefore, out of place for him to create the impression that “it was only a discussion and not an agreement”.

“We are convinced it was an agreement. There is no ambiguity,” Mr Justice Baffoe-Bonnie pointed out, and said it was, therefore, strange and surprising for Mr Addison to create such an impression.

Mr Addison responded that if that was the order, then the KPMG had not complied because it had so far worked on one set of pink sheets.

Mr Justice Atuguba said the court had received a number of correspondence from parties on the issue of the mode of conduct of the audit into the pink sheets and stated that the court was clear the directive on the use of the control pink sheets had been made.


Pink Sheet ‘Commotion’

Counsel for the President, Mr Tony Lithur and Mr Samuel Codjoe, in a letter dated May 21, 2013 and addressed to KPMG, had alleged that 10 additional boxes had been added to 24 already inspected boxes.

“It is our opinion that the 10 boxes that were not part of those inspected on May 16, 2013 ought to be identified, isolated and excluded, as they are not part of the subject matter of the court order on May 9, 2013,” the letter stated.

Lawyers for the petitioners, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the allegations.


The Petition

The hearing of the substantive petition began on April 17, 2013.

So far, Dr Mahamudu Bawumia and the General Secretary of the NDC, Mr Johnson Asiedu Nketia, have testified.

 The Chairman of the EC, Dr Kwadwo Afari-Gyan, began giving his evidence-in-chief on Thursday, May 30, 2013 and completed on June 4, 2013. He is currently being cross-examined by Mr Addison.

Dr Afari-Gyan has since been cross-examined by Mr Lithur and Mr Tsikata.

According to the petitioners, the December 7 and 8, 2012 presidential election was fraught with malpractices of over-voting, non-signing of pink sheets by some presiding officers or their assistants, voting without biometric verification and duplicated serial numbers of pink sheets.

However, President Mahama, the EC and the NDC have denied that any such irregularities occurred during the election.

Story: Mabel Aku Baneseh

Writer’s email: [email protected].

Connect With Us : 0242202447 | 0551484843 | 0266361755 | 059 199 7513 |