Information Minister designate Kojo Oppong renewed his unfulfilled pledge to GJA UER Branch
Kojo Oppong Nkrumah the information Minister-designate has given the assurance of redeeming the 2019 pledge he made to the Upper East Regional branch of the Ghana Journalists Association at the EXTEE Crystal Hotel conference hall in support of the first edition of the Regional Awards. According to Mr. Oppong Nkrumah who appeared a little shocked when the issue was raised by the Tamale North Member of Parliament Alhassan Suhuyini he said, the matter of redeeming the pledge was directed to the Chief Director of the Ministry at a time. The Information Minister Kojo Oppong Nkrumah made a pledge of Ten Thousand Ghana Cedis (Ghc 10, 000.00) in October 2019 during the launch of the first edition of GJA award in the Upper East Region. But disappointingly, the pledge by Mr. Oppong Nkrumah has not been redeemed as promised to the Upper East branch of the Ghana Journalist Association even in the year 2021. However, during the vetting of Mr. Oppong Nkrumah by members of the Appointment Committee of Parliament on Thursday, February 18, 2021, he said, “I do recall making a pledge to the upper east regional branch of the GJA after I traveled to join them in one celebration. I do recall issuing the instruction to our Chief Director to ensure it was satisfied. I would expect that it would have been satisfied by now. If it is not, I will be happy to look at it once again,” Mr. Oppong Nkrumah told members of the member of the Appointments Committee of Parliament. Apexnewsgh.com/Ghana/Ngamegbulam Chidozie Stephen Please contact Apexnewsgh.com on email apexnewsgh@gmail.com for your credible news publications. Contact: +233555568093
Supreme Court cites Dominic Ayine for contempt over his “predetermined agenda” comment
The Supreme Court has instituted contempt proceedings against, Dr Dominic Ayine, a member of the legal team of the petitioner in the ongoing election 2020 petition for comments he allegedly made against the Apex Court. Dr Ayine is reported to have accused the seven-member Supreme Court panel adjudicating the petition,of having a “predetermined agenda” to rule against the petitioner (John Dramani Mahama) in his action challenging the constitutionality of the re-election of President Akufo-Addo for a second term in office. During the said press briefing, Dr. Ayine said, “It is not true that there is only one issue that needs to be determined in this matter. I am surprised that the Supreme Court itself having set down five key issues to be determined is now reducing the issue to one, which is whether the extent to which the evidence that we have led shows that no one got more than 50% of the votes in accordance with Article 63 of the Constitution”. Dr Ayine added: “We have made it abundantly clear in the petition that there were a number of infractions, we are contesting even the constitutionality of the declaration that was made. We are saying that she violated Article 23 because she is an administrative body, we have also said the exercise of discretion was contrary to Article 296 of the Constitution. “And to reduce the petition to a single-issue petition is rather unfortunate and smack of a predetermined agenda to rule against the petition in this matter.” He added, “We think that the court by this decision has not done the people of this country a great service, in the sense that Ghanaians are interested in knowing the truth. The justices today have not given as a reason to believe that they want the people of this country to know the truth about what happened…why figures kept changing from 9 December” Dr. Dominic Ayine further stated while he addressed the press at the forecourt of the Supreme Court. The seven-member Supreme Court panel presided over by Chief Justice Anin Yeboah, which also includes Justices Yaw Appaw, Samuel Marful-Sau, Nene Amegatcher, Nii Ashie Kotey, Mariama Owusu and Gertrude Torkonoo, is expected to sit Thursday the 18th of February 2021 to continue with the trial of the 2020 election petition. It is likely that Dr. Ayine will be served with the process today (18 February 2021) and subsequently he will be called to answer to the Court why he should not be found to be in contempt of Court for his comments allegedly made against the Supreme Court. Asaase Please contact Apexnewsgh.com on email apexnewsgh@gmail.com for your credible news publications. Contact: +233555568093
I regret Kasoa gun shooting incident – Hawa Koomson
The Minister-designate for Fisheries Mavis Hawa Koomson says she regrets her gun shooting incident at Kasoa during the voter’s registration exercise. “I’d want to put on record that the incident didn’t happen at the polling centre. It happened about 150 meters from the polling centre but I still regret it. I wish it never happened in our political history,” the former Special Development Initiative Minister told the Appointment Committee Thursday during her vetting. She noted that the gun she used was registered. The MP who has confessed to firing a warning shot at the polling centre claimed it was to defend herself after feeling threatened while touring registration centres at Kasoa. Civil Society groups, as well as security analysts called for her arrest, prosecution and resignation. Security expert Professor Kwesi Aning said the action by the Minister undermines President Akufo-Addo’s fight against vigilantism in the country. According to him, the MP is unfit to hold herself out as a lawmaker and also as a member of the ruling New Patriotic Party. Addressing the Media, Director for Elections for the opposition NDC Elvis Afriyie Ankrah said if President Akufo-Addo fails to prosecute the Minister, the next NDC government under John Mahama will ensure that the minister faces the law. Starrfm Please contact Apexnewsgh.com on email apexnewsgh@gmail.com for your credible news publications. Contact: +233555568093
Stop demonising Mahama lawyers, inciting SC against Ayine – NDC warns Oppong Nkrumah
Information Minister-designate Kojo Oppong Nkrumah must stop inciting the Supreme Court against former Deputy Attorney General Dr Domini Ayine as far as the election petition hearing is concerned, the main opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) has warned. A statement issued on Thursday, 18 February 2021 by Communication Director Kakra Essamuah took issue with what it describes as the constant attacks unleashed on the lawyers of former President John Mahama, the petitioner, by the legal spokespersons of the second respondent, President Nana Akufo-Addo. The NDC singled out Mr Oppong Nkrumah and his fellow lawyer, Mr Henry Boakye, as the main culprits. Read the NDC’s full statement below: NDC STATEMENT ON ATTEMPTS BY KOJO OPPONG NKRUMAH AND HENRY NANA BOAKYE TO INCITE THE SUPREME COURT AGAINST NDC LAWYERS. In the course of the hearing of the presidential election petition initiated by HE John Dramani Mahama in the Supreme Court, both the NDC and the NPP have sets of lawyers who meet the media immediately after each sitting to publicise their view of what has taken place in court. It is a process from which the good people of Ghana have come to appreciate the respective positions of the parties litigating in the court. Unfortunately, in recent times, the NPP team, led by Hon. Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, has been using the podium offered by the media, to attack counsel representing HE John Mahama in the case, and even going further to incite the court against the former Deputy Attorney General, Hon. Dr. Dominic Ayine. In addition, many NPP legal commentators in the media, appear to take inordinate delight in belittling and heaping insults on counsel for HE John Mahama and the NDC. These attacks are characterised by constantly offering misleading comments about our lawyers and the case in court. We consider this persistent conduct of Hon. Oppong Nkrumah and Henry Nana Boakye and their surrogates as unbecoming of professional colleagues, who have sworn to protect the ethics of their respected profession over and above partisan considerations. The Supreme Court exists to do justice fairly and squarely to all citizens irrespective of political colours, and to attempt to incite the court against our noble lawyers, is to debase the court’s role and duty. We, accordingly, condemn, in no uncertain terms, this unfortunate conduct of the NPP to demonise our counsel before the Supreme Court. The truth shall stand. The truth shall prevail. LONG LIVE THE NDC. ISSUED IN ACCRA THIS 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021 (signed) KAKRA ESSAMUAH DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS Please contact Apexnewsgh.com on email apexnewsgh@gmail.com for your credible news publications. Contact: +233555568093
I am severely disappointed in the honorable Kojo Oppong Nkrumah–Dr. Dominic Ayine
The Member of Parliament for Bolgatanga East and former Deputy Attorney General, Dr. Dominic Ayine, has registered his displeasure on the posture of the Information Minister Designate Kojo Oppong Nkrumah. Dr. Ayine who was speaking in an interview monitored by Apexnewsgh.com said, he is severely disappointed with Kojo Oppong Nkrumah. “I must say that I am severely disappointed in the honorable Kojo Oppong Nkrumah. I am a senior lawyer to Kojo. Kojo should not take to always seeking to incite the court against me, as if I do not know what I am saying”, Dr. Ayine told Starrfm monitored by Apexnewsgh.com According to Dr. Ayine, Mr. Oppong Nkrumah has always sought to knock the Supreme Court head against him after engaging and responding to journalists in the ongoing election petition in which former President John Mahama, the petitioner, is challenging the results of the 2020 presidential polls. Speaking to the media after court proceedings on Tuesday, February 16, the Information Minister-designate Kojo Oppong Nkrumah described Dr. Ayine’s response to media as ‘scandalous of the court’ “That is scandalous of the court. When you make a legal argument and it is upheld that one is good when you make an argument and it doesn’t meet the threshold then it means that they are wrong in law or that they had a predetermined agenda”. His response has not gone well to the Deputy Attorney General Dr. Ayine, who is currently severely disappointed in Kojo Oppong Nkrumah. Apexnewsgh.com/Ghana/Ngamegbulam Chidozie Stephen Please contact Apexnewsgh.com on email apexnewsgh@gmail.com for your credible news publications. Contact: +233555568093
You’re my ‘small boy’ at the Bar; stop ‘inciting’ SC against me on my ‘predetermined agenda comment’ – Ayine warns Oppong Nkrumah
Former Deputy Attorney General, Dr Dominic Ayine, has accused Information Minister-designate Kojo Oppong Nkrumah of “always” seeking to “incite” the Supreme Court against him in his post-trial commentary to journalists in the ongoing election petition in which former President John Mahama, the petitioner, is challenging the results of the 2020 presidential polls. Dr Ayine’s complaint follows a chastisement of him by Mr Oppong Nkrumah after Tuesday’s hearing, in which the Ofoase Ayirebi MP of the governing New Patriotic Party (NPP) accused the Bolga East MP of the main opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) of “scandalising” the Supreme Court by suggesting that there was a “predetermined agenda” to rule against his client, Mr Mahama. After the court ruled against Mr Mahama’s application to reopen his case on Tuesday, Dr Ayine told journalists: “The Supreme Court asked itself a question, which we deem as a wrong question and answered that question. It said: why does the Chairperson need to account to the people of Ghana when she’s not a party to the suit”. “Now you’ll recall that counsel made it clear that one of the reasons we are in court is because of the unconstitutional conduct of Mrs Jean Adukwei Mensa as the returning officer under the Constitution and it is not true that there is only one issue that needs to be determined in this matter”, the lawmaker said. He continued: “I am surprised that the Supreme Court itself, having set down five key issues to be determined, is now reducing the issues to one, which is whether and extent to which the evidence that we have led, shows that no one got more than 50 per cent of the votes in accordance with article 53 of the Constitution”. “But we have made it abundantly clear in the petition that there were a number of infractions”. “We are contesting even the constitutionality of the declaration that was made. We are saying that she violated article 23 of the Constitution because she’s an administrative body”. “We have also said her exercise of discretion was contrary to article 296 of the Constitution”. “These are all germane issues under the Constitution and laws of Ghana and to reduce the petition into a single-issue petition, is rather unfortunate and smacks of a predetermined agenda to rule against the petitioner in this matter”. Reacting to his comments, Mr Oppong Nkrumah said: “It is not fair to the judicial system, it’s not fair to our democracy, it’s not fair to the people of Ghana that when you lose an application because it is not grounded in law or because you’ve failed to meet the legal standard, then you come here and literally poison the minds of the public and make claims that they may be having a predetermined agenda. That’s scandalous of the court”. “When you make a legal argument and it is upheld, that one is good; when you make an argument and it doesn’t meet the threshold, then it means that they are wrong in law or that they have a predetermined agenda”. “The Supreme Court has not reduced the petition to a single issue. We tried our best to transcribe the ruling and we’re waiting for the written version of it. The court said that the major issue, it didn’t say there was a single issue before it…” Mr Ayine has, however, taken issue with his fellow lawyer and lawmaker’s counter-comments. “I must say that I am severely disappointed in the honorable Kojo Oppong Nkrumah. I am a senior lawyer to Kojo. Kojo should not take to always seeking to incite the court against me, as if I do not know what I am saying”, he complained in an interview with Accra-based Starr FM. First of all, he pointed out, “as a former Deputy Attorney General and a senior person at the bar, I know what it means to scandalise the highest court of the land”, insisting: “I have had no intention whatsoever of scandalising the Supreme Court of the Republic of Ghana”. “If I came across as having said that the court is in cahoots with the respondents; that, I will apologise and withdraw”, he noted, explaining: “But the reason I said that is because that is what the respondent has been telling the media”. Dr Ayine continued: “Now, tell me: is the duty of the respondent to evaluate the evidence brought by the parties or it is the duty of the lawyers, spokespersons to say that your petition is empty even when they are commenting on the merit?” “Kojo Oppong Nkrumah should know that he has been violating the sub judice rule on a daily basis. He has always been preempting outcomes of the courts saying: ‘The petition is empty’, ‘it does not discharge the burden the proof and so on’. Does he know that is a violation of the sub judice rule and that he should be hauled before court for commenting on the merit of the petition?” Dr Ayine said he would not be surprised if the court admonishes him for his comments. “I will not be surprised and the court is entitled to take a position on it or express disappointment on it – even go as far as committing me for contempt”. “I won’t begrudge them”, he said, “but that honestly wasn’t meant to disparage the court or bring its reputation into disrepute”, he clarified. Classfmonline Please contact Apexnewsgh.com on email apexnewsgh@gmail.com for your credible news publications. Contact: +233555568093
I would advise my brother JDM/NDC to withdraw the case
A respected member of the opposition National Democratic Congress Stephen Atubiga who contested John Dramani Mahama in the 2020 party Presidential primaries has revealed that, If the justices do not give justice to John Dramani Mahama in Tuesday’s ruling, he would advise his brother and NDC to withdraw the case, and let posterity be the judge. According to Mr. Atubiga, “JDM would always have a red carpet rolled by me for him, anytime he is ready to lead NDC again”. Below is his full statement: If the justices do not give justice to JDM today, I would advise my brother JDM / NDC to withdraw the case, and let posterity be the judge. JDM would always have a red carpet rolled by me for him, anytime he is ready to lead NDC again. The 7, against 0 votes from the justices from day one, has prepared most NDC members mindset of miscarriage judgment of justice awaiting NDC. The best justice, the legal team of JDM /NDC can give to the 6+million voters of the NDC/ Ghanaians, is to allow posterity to give judgment on this case with time. I have heard a lot about why Jean Mensah is protected from the witness box. Some are saying in case of runoff directives from the court, her integrity may be damaged not enabling her supervising another election in the country. Well, some of us who are political predictors, political visionaries, political herbalists, with political prophecies, can boldly tell you NDC/JDM would not get justice. Stephen Atubiga Apexnewsgh.com/Ghana/Ngamegbulam Chidozie Stephen Please contact Apexnewsgh.com on email apexnewsgh@gmail.com for your credible news publications. Contact: +233555568093
Breaking News: Mahama can’t reopen case to cross-examine Jean Mensa – Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of Ghana has ruled that former President John Mahama, the petitioner in the ongoing election petition, cannot reopen his case after closing it. Chief Justice Anin Yeboah read the ruling in court on Tuesday, 16 February 2021. He quoted several authorities to buttress the court’s position. “A mere filing of a witness statement is not an election to testify”, Justice Anin Yeboah said, adding: “We accordingly refuse that application”. Mr Mahama’s lead counsel, Mr Tsatsu Tsikata, had argued in court on Monday, 15 February that his side intended reopening the case so that it could subpoena the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission, Mrs Jean Mensa, as a “hostile” or “adverse” witness if leave had been granted by the court to his side’s prayer. Mr Tsikata also insisted that for the sake of the God Mrs Mensa worships, it was important for her to mount the witness box. In his counter-arguments against the reopening of the case, Mr Justin Amenuvor, lead counsel for the EC said allowing Mr Tsikata to cross-examine Mrs Mensa as a hostile witness would be an abuse of the legal process. Also, Mr Akoto Ampaw, the lead counsel for President Nana Akufo-Addo, the second respondent in the case, argued that the party that bore the burden of proof, “as the petitioner does in this matter, must effectively meet that burden of proof”. Prior to Monday’s hearing, Mrs Mensa, the star witness of the first respondent, the EC, deposed to an affidavit opposing Mr Mahama’s push prayer to the apex court to reopen his case. The affidavit said the EC “decided that it would not waste time and effort over the tottering case” of Mr Mahama, “hence, my decision not to testify because there was nothing to testify about”. Mrs Mensa added: “The 1st respondent is opposed to the said application and says that the application is not warranted by any rule of law or procedure and the same should be dismissed by this honourable court”. “I am advised and verily believe that the application does not show sufficient reason for the court to permit the petitioner to reopen his case. I am advised that reopening a case is not a remedy for the asking; the applicant must show the harm to be suffered if the case were not reopened. The petitioner skipped this requirement”. “Again, I am advised that the petitioner’s lawyers were confident when they closed his case without reservation, and this court ought not to permit proceedings before it to drag unduly on the basis of a party’s afterthought and inability to prove its case in court,” the affidavit said. The EC added that the “petitioner entered into the contest herein believing that he would testify if need be. It became clear, too soon, that the petitioner’s case drifted into departures from the Strong Room by the petitioner’s agent of his own volition and grievances that I had served ‘tea without biscuits’ to the petitioner’s agent who had left the Strong Room to be in my secretariat”. “The 1st Respondent Commission decided that it would not waste time and effort over the tottering case hence my decision not to testify because there was nothing to testify about”. “Again, the petitioner deposes in support of his case to matters concerning ‘the biometric verification process for which huge sums of taxpayers’ money was spent.’ These are matters that have sprung up in this application for the first time and do not form the basis of the petitioner’s petition”. “I verily believe that there are more convenient fora (forums) for ventilating the so-called public interest issues and further that this should not form the basis of the petitioner re-opening his case in a presidential election petition in court”. “The petitioner deposes in the supporting affidavit further that this court has the power to summon me, as a witness. I am advised and verily believe that the application is an abuse of this honourable court’s process insofar as it does not tell this court whether I am needed as a witness for the petitioner or for the 1st Respondent or what I am required to say”. “I verily believe that this court has power to call a witness suo motu but not a party, let alone a party adjudged to have a vested right to decide not to testify”. “I am opposed to the petitioner being granted leave by this honourable court to re-open a case that he closed of his own volition without compulsion”. “I am advised that even if this court grants leave for the petitioner to reopen its case; it ought not cause a subpoena to be issued against me because a subpoena is issued with coercive effect,” Mensa noted. Please contact Apexnewsgh.com on email apexnewsgh@gmail.com for your credible news publications. Contact: +233555568093
“What Koraaa Is The Issue With Mr Tsikata? – Gabby Otchere Darko Questioned
The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected the application to inspect six (6) documents of the Electoral Commission(EC) an application filed by the 2020 presidential candidate for the National Democratic Congress (NDC) John Dramani Mahama. The legal team of John Mahama is asking for six documents including the originals of the constituency presidential election result collation forms (form 9) for all constituencies, the originals of all constituency presidential election results summary sheet (form 10) and the originals of the regional presidential election collation forms (form 11) for all regions. They are also asking for the originals of the regional presidential election results summary sheets (form 12) for all regions and the original of the declaration of the presidential results form (form 13) as well as the records of the alleged update to the purported declaration of presidential election results on 9th December 2020, of the results of four (4) constituencies in the Greater Accra Region. In reaction to this, a leading member of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Gabby Otchere Darko queried: “what really is the issue” “The so-called Form 13 (Declaration of Presidential Results Form) is already filed as Exhibit 4 and attached to witness statement of Jean Mensa. There’s only one Form 13 used and only one in dispute and the EC has filed it. So, what really is the issue, Mr Tsikata? What koraaa?” he tweeted Lead counsel for Mr. Mahama, Tsatsu Tsikata said: “these are plain circumstances which necessitate a reference back to the original documents which are in the custody of the first respondent (EC) so that there could be a proper validation of what the correct figure is,” he said. Apexnewsgh.com/Ghana/Ngamegbulam Chidozie Stephen Please contact Apexnewsgh.com on email apexnewsgh@gmail.com for your credible news publications. Contact: 0555568093
Oppong Nkrumah very optimistic with the court outcome as he explains….
Information Minister Designate and Spokesperson for the Legal Team of the Second Respondent in the Presidential Election Petition, Kojo Oppong Nkrumah explains the outcome of the February 2, 2021 election petition hearing. According to Mr. Oppong Nkrumah who was addressing the media after the court hearing, he very optimistic that the issue of whether the EC has the right to instruct the representatives of the petitioner was made clear in Supreme Court today. “When you read the witness statement, the witness statement says, ‘we were asked’, check the definition of ‘asked’. Now in the witnessed box and under oath, he seeks to amend that ‘they were instructed’ and that is why see lawyer Akoto Ampaw did not take too much time in his cross-examination. He asked one key question, he said, I put it to you that you know that you cannot be instructed by the chair of the first respondent and he said replied yes, we cannot be instructed by the chair of the first respondent”. According to Mr. Oppong Nkrumah that fallacy is settled and the court will take notice of it that, it cannot be true that the Chair of the Electoral Commission will instruct and representative of the President will obey her instruction. “Another matter that is been settled is the attempt of the petitioner and his witnesses to repeatedly question the result by discrediting their own agents”. According to Mr. Nkrumah, from the beginning of the case, the petitioner came up with an argument that numbers have been cooked up and that the EC was incorrect. “…yesterday you saw Mr. Asiedu Nketia arriving at 47.51, 47.51. Today, they tried other tactics by trying to suggest that there was something wrong with result that their agent had satisfied from the polling station through the constituency to the regions”. “But in cross-examination, you saw It come out, and is been settled that they cannot use the back door to discredit their very own agents who satisfied the result from the bottom up and then claimed that somebody from the national had said that the figures did not add up…” Mr. Oppong Nkrumah explained Apexnewsgh.com/Ghana/Ngamegbulam Chidozie Stephen Please contact Apexnewsgh.com on email apexnewsgh@gmail.com for your credible news publications. Contact: 0555568093.