After singing to the whole world that there was no collation of election results in Techiman South, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) is seeking the court’s intervention to reverse its claim.
The opposition NDC has therefore filed an interlocutory appeal against the decision of a Wenchi High Court which dismissed its application to amend portions of its petition against the results of the Techiman South parliamentary election.
The plaintiff in the interlocutory appeal avers that the High court presided over by Justice Fredrick Arnold Nawurah made an error in law when he dismissed the applicant’s motion for leave to amend portions of the petition.
The party through its parliamentary candidate, Christopher Baasongti Beyere is in court challenging the validity of the election of NPP’s candidate, Martin Kwaku Adjei-Mensah Korsah as MP for Techiman South.
They were challenging the election on grounds that there was no valid collation of results in the constituency and their own calculation favoured, Christopher Baasongti Beyere.
The Wenchi High Court during the hearing of the case ordered the Electoral Commission (EC) to produce the collated results and pink sheets of the constituency which the EC complied with.
The documents presented by the EC clearly indicated that there was collation of the results of the constituency and Mr. Adjei-Mensah Korsah was validly elected.
The NDC quickly then changed their earlier stance, now claiming that there was collation but was rigged in favour of the NPP Parliamentary candidate.
The party therefore, sought leave of the court to amend the petitioner’s reliefs.
But the presiding judge, Justice Fredrick Arnold Nawurah on April 29, 2021, dismissed the application on grounds that the petitioner was embarking on a fishing expedition to rather rely on the documents of the defense to strengthen his case.
Appeal
Not satisfied with the decision of the High Court, the party has filed an interlocutory appeal seeking to reverse the decision of the High Court.
The NDC’s ground of appeal is that “the judge of the trial High Court erred in law when he ruled that there was no need for an amendment of the Petitioner/Applicant’s reliefs before he could grant relief not prayed for in the parliamentary election petition.
They further argue that the trial judge “erred when he dismissed the Petitioner/Applicant’s motion for leave to amend the Petitioner/Applicant’s Parliamentary selection petition to include reliefs under Section 19 of the Representation of the People Act, 1992 (PNDCL 284).
They’re are therefore, seeking to reverse the ruling of the High Court and “an order be made granting leave to the Petitioner/Applicant to amend his Parliamentary election petition to include the reliefs outlined in the petitioner’s motion for leave to amend his parliamentary election petition to include reliefs under Section 19 of the Representation of the People Act, 1992 (PNDCL 284).
BY Gibril Abdul Razak