The address is scheduled to take place at 6pm on his social media handle and Woezor TV.
In a unanimous decision, the apex court of the land dismissed his case affirming Akufo-Addo has legitimate president of the country.
According to the Supreme Court, it is unable to order for an election rerun because Mahama and his witnesses failed to adduce credible evidence.
“The petitioner has not produced any evidence to rebut the presumptions created by the publication of CI 135 for which his action has failed. We have therefore no reason to order for a rerun…we accordingly dismiss the petition as having no merit,” Chief Justice Anin Yeboah has ruled.
According to the Court, the petitioner based his case on an error made by the chairperson of the EC during the declaration, but that error could not void the will of the people in electing a President.
The Supreme Court also held that the error made by the Electoral Commission (EC) in using the total votes cast as the total valid votes during the declaration was corrected, with the correction in accordance with the law.
John Mahama, the petitioner had claimed that none of the candidates who contested the polls obtained more than 50% of the votes cast.
Mahama alleged that the second respondent, President Akufo-Addo won the election through vote padding.
He also claimed the candidate benefitted from arithmetic and computational errors. He concludes that the EC’s declaration of President Akufo-Addo is unconstitutional since he did not obtain more than 50% of the votes cast.
What the petitioner wanted
Mahama wanted the Supreme Court to rule that the presidential election result as declared by the EC chairperson, Jean Mensa, breached the constitution.
He was further asking the court to annul the results of the polls and order the EC to organize a run-off between himself and President Akufo-Addo.
The Supreme Court before trial commenced set the following issues for determination
- Whether or not the petition discloses any reasonable cause of action
- Whether or not based on the data contained in the declaration of the 1st Respondent (EC), no candidate obtained more than 50% of the valid votes cast as required by article 63 (3) of the 1992 constitution
- Whether or not the 2nd Respondent still met the article 63 (3) of the 1992 constitution threshold by the exclusion or inclusion of the Techiman South constituency Presidential Election Results of 2020
- Whether or not the declaration by the 1st Respondent dated the 9th of December was in violation of article 63 (3) of the 1992 constitution.
- Whether or not the alleged vote padding and other errors complained of by the petitioner affected the outcome of the Presidential Election results of 2020.
But reading the ruling of the Supreme Court today (4 March 2021), Chief Justice Anin Yeboah said the petitioner did not satisfy all the five issues outlined by the court to determine the case.
Source: Daily Mail GH