A member of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) legal team, Abraham Amaliba, has raised objections to claims by Tsatsu Tsikata that Justice Anin-Yeboah has been consistent in voting against pleadings of the respondents in the just ended presidential election petition.
“One area I don’t agree with Tsatsu is where he said a judge voted consistently. I have seen the interlocutory applications and the interlocutory matters; judges voted differently,’’ he said.
Speaking on Citi Fm’s news analysis program, The Big Issue, Mr. Amaliba pointed out that per the evidence of proceedings at the Supreme Court, Tsatsu Tsikata “got it wrong” on some of his accusations.
“I am being frank on this matter; on that score he [Tsatsu Tsikata] says that a particular judge voted consistently, I disagree with Tsatsu on that matter,” he told show host Richard Sky, adding “there were judges who also veered and went and came back…’’
But Mr. Amaliba also said it was unfair to limit the matter to Mr Tsikata. According to him, Mr Gabby Asare Otchere-Darko of the Danquah Institute (DI) also made potentially damaging comments about the Supreme Court judgment , which affirmed John Mahama as having been validly elected President in the 2012 elections.
“It is disgusting to just limit the matter to Tsatsu; we have one Asare Otchere Darko who virtually condemned the entire bench and we are not hearing that.”
Mr. Tsatsu Tsikata has faced widespread condemnation for singling out Justice Anin-Yeboah for attack over his stance in the overall judgment of the Supreme Court on the election petition. He accused the judge of being politically biased in his rulings.
|Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not reflect those of Peacefmonline.com. Peacefmonline.com accepts no responsibility legal or otherwise for their accuracy of content. Please report any inappropriate content to us, and we will evaluate it as a matter of priority.|