The lawyers of former President John Mahama in the ongoing election petition have said they disagree with the Supreme Court’s ruling on Thursday, 11 Friday 2021 that they cannot compel the first and second respondents to mount the dock against their wish.

Chief Justice Anin Yeboah read the ruling, which said in part: “We are minded to state that our jurisdiction invoked in this election petition is a limited jurisdiction clearly circumscribed by law”, adding: “We do not intend to extend our mandate beyond what the law requires of us in such petitions brought under Article 64 (1) challenging the validity of the election of a president”.

“Simply put, we are not convinced, and we will not yield to the invitation being extended to us by counsel for the petitioner, to order the respondent to enter the witness box to be cross-examined”.

“Accordingly, we hereby overrule the objection raised by the counsel for the petitioner against the decision of the respondents declining to adduce evidence in this petition,” he added.

Speaking to journalists after the ruling, former Attorney General Marietta Brew Appiah-Opong, who is one of the lawyers for former President Mahama, said: “We disagree”, adding: “It is as simple as that”.

“We have nothing to do about the decision of the court but accept it, and, so, we are going to file for an application of review. Counsel for the petitioner has announced that he will file a review of today’s decision of the court. You heard the Lordships, they said no one can stop us from filing an application”, she noted.

She continued: “The Chairperson in the past has said she will be available for cross-examination. We have an EC who when a request for interrogatories was served on her in the past, she refused to respond. The EC has to be accountable to us and tell us how she made those errors. There are questions we have to put to her [Jean Mensa] that no one can answer. She alone can answer”.