Robert Joseph Mettle-Nunoo, a third Witness for the petitioner in the Election 2020 trial on Monday testified and denied before the Supreme Court that his witness statement were made up of half-truths.
The third witness for the Petitioner made the denial when he was cross examined via zoom at the Supreme Court in Accra.
The witness was to testify in person at the Supreme Court but his lawyer Tsatsu Tsikata informed the court that he was unwell and due to the confidentiality of this ailment he (witness) could not appear before the court to testify.
Answering questions under cross-examination by Justine Amenuvor, counsel for the first respondent (EC), the third witness said his evidence before the Supreme Court was “absolute truth”.
He admitted that his presence at the EC strong room was not the first time, and had supervised elections for his party’s presidential candidates, adding that, he has supervised elections for his party since 1992.
Mr Mettle-Nunoo disagreed with the EC’s lawyer that he left the strong room on his own volition.
Rojo however admitted spending three hours in the EC chairperson’s office drinking tea.
According to the witness he was asked by EC chairperson to leave the strong room.
Yet in another explanation, Mr Mettle-Nunoo said, he also informed all members present at the strong room that he and Kpessa-Whyte were going to see their presidential candidate and would return.
The witness said what he was going to tell his presidential candidate centered on some irregularities and anomalies he had observed in the 2020 election results.
He further admitted signing 13 out of the 16 Regional Summary Sheets before leaving the Strong room of the EC.
The witness admitted that not all the results had arrived at the EC’s strong room at the time he left.
The cross examination by the EC lawyer of the third witness nearly resulted in a fiery exchanges after the EC counsel had described the witness temperament and character as “ungovernable.”
Mr Mettle-Nunoo told the court that he had a strong temperament because of his “quest to defend and uphold fairness and the truth at all times.”
Mr Mettle-Nunoo said: “I have a temperament for fairness, I have a temperament for telling the truth, I have a temperament that makes me want to fight to defend the integrity of my name”.
The witness rejected an assertion of the EC’s lawyer that his statement and testimony to the court were a “bad explanation for the bad job you did” on behalf of the petitioner at the Strong Room of the EC.
“You are being judgmental,” Mr Mettle-Nunoo responded saying: “I was performing a function that was supposed to protect the interest of my presidential candidate and I did it based on my knowledge, past experience and a certain sense of high maturity in the strong room.
“If I had misconducted myself, this country would be at war by now. You need to appreciate that. It is my very mature handling of the situation. And don’t forget, the EC Chair said that she was going to declare the results in 24 hours and there were so many anomalies,” the witness told the court.
Answering questions from the second respondent’s lawyer, Mr Akoto Ampaw, the third witness admitted that before coming to court to testify he had listen to the news and certain portions of the court proceedings.
Answering questions from the Supreme Court judges, Mr Mettle-Nunoo admitted that he signed 13 Regional Summary Sheets before leaving to see the Petitioner.
The Court discharged Mr Mettle-Nunoo after the cross examination by lawyers of the first and second respondents.
The Petitioner also closed his case after its’ third witness testimony before the court.
The petitioner had gone to the Supreme Court challenging the validity of the Election 2020 results declaring Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo as the winner.
Mr Mahama also accused the EC of vote padding, an assertion the EC had denied.