Kojo Oppong-Nkrumah, one of the spokespersons for the second Respondent in the progressing Election Petition at the Supreme Court has made contention by inquiring as to why John Mahama isn't in the observer box. 

After the consultation on Monday, 8 February, the media questioned why Jean Mensa was "fleeing" from the normal cross examination however Oppong Nkrumah countered: 

"… isn't it intriguing that Mr Mahama himself, the Petitioner, didn't mount the observer box and we are not contending regarding why he isn't in the observer box? Why has he not taken the observer box? Would anybody be able to drive him to take the observer box?" 

Would anybody be able to compel Mr Mahama to take the observer box? Would anybody be able to compel the other two observers of the NDC that forcibly they ought to get into the crate? 

Thus, in the event that you are getting some information about the declaration that we won't place anyone in the case, it is on the grounds that our legal counselors are of the view that, that essential limit [of the candidate introducing a winnable case] has not been met," Oppong-Nkrumah disclosed to the media. 

Advice for the first Respondent and second Respondent told the Supreme Court on Monday, February 8, 2021, that they don't mean to open their safeguard or call observers. 

The Counsels contended that proof introduced by the observers for the candidate and from questioning doesn't uphold the reliefs being mentioned by Mr Mahama in the appeal recorded. 

Refering to Order 36 Rule 43 and C. I 87 standard 3 (e) 5, lead counsel for the EC, Justin Amenuvor told the 7-part board of judges that the EC was happy with procedures up until this point and requested that the court make an assurance on the appeal before it. 

Be that as it may, Tsatsu Tsikata oppose this idea. 

He affirmed that the move by the first and second Respondents is an intentional endeavor by the EC Chairperson, Jean Mensa, to dodge questioning which will uncover the lawless acts that described the December 7 decisions. 

Attorney Tsatsu Tsikata clarified further that the solicitation by the guidance for the Respondent was not in accordance with Order 36 Rule 43 and CI 87 guideline 3 (e) 5 as expressed. 

However, the adjudicators agreed with the respondents, adding that the observers can't be constrained to affirm. 

The Supreme Court will continue hearing today for the gatherings to contend on the matter. 

Watch underneath Kojo Oppong-Nkrumah addressing the press

Content created and supplied by: Hellenasare7 (via Opera News )