What is this interrogatories that the NDC is seeking at the Supreme Court


A seven-member panel of Judges, (Chief Justice Anin-Yeboah; Justices Yaw Appau, Marful Sau, Professor Ashie Kotei, Mariama Owusu, Nene Amegatcher, and Gertrude Tokonor) has dismissed a motion by former President John Mahama seeking permission to elicit answers to some 12 interrogatories from the Electoral Commission.

In law, interrogatories are a formal set of written questions propounded by one litigant and required to be answered by an adversary in order to clarify matters of fact and help to determine in advance what facts will be presented at any trial in the case. 

The NDC was seeking to fast track trial especially when it comes to cross-examining the Electoral Commission. In other words they were seeking to limit the number of days to be used for cross examination.

With the dismissal of the application, John Mahama does not suffer any loss as his lawyers will have opportunity to put the same questions to Jean Mensah when she enters the witness box.



Lawyers for John Mahama are asking the EC to answer if the National Communications Authority (NCA) played any role or facilitated in any way, the transmission of the election results to its headquarters.

Again, Mr Mahama wants to know how the Chairperson of the EC, Jean Mensa, arrived at the figures she used in declaring candidate Nana Akufo-Addo as the winner of the 2020 presidential poll.

Lead Counsel Tsatsu Tsikata argues that, the interrogatories are critical as it would help the apex court determine the authenticity of the results that saw the NPP presidential candidate, emerging as the winner of the 2020 polls.

But the EC’s lawyer, Justin Amenuvor contends that Mr. Tsikata is using the back door to introduce matters that are not stated in their earlier petition.

He was of the view that most of the questions are not in contention and have either been answered by the EC or is information that John Mahama is well aware of because he deployed agents across the country.

Giving its verdict on the motion, the Supreme Court held the view that Lawyer Tsatsu was relying on CI 47 while the current rule in force relating to the Supreme Court is the CI 99.


Categories: Ghanaian News

Tagged as: ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s