Justice Abdulai, a private legal practitioner, has observed that the evidence presented by the Electoral Commission ( EC) on allegations of forgery leading to the disqualification of presidential candidates is not adequate.
He claimed that “according to the statute, the forensic evidence submitted by the EC from the Police Criminal Investigation Department ( CID) is not enough.”
Mr. Abdulai stated that the EC’s facts would not entirely fulfill the requirements of the law, noting that “I believe that the correct way would mean inviting persons whose signatures were forged and persons who were alleged to have forged a signature.”
His findings follow an EC allegation that 19 individuals who allegedly endorsed the candidate of the Convention People’s Party (CPP) also endorsed Kofi Koranteng, an independent presidential candidate.
The Commission reported that the CID had concluded that the signatures had been forged, leading to the candidate’s disqualification.
“However, Mr. Abdulai insisted that the forensic evidence provided by the EC was not sufficiently reliable to hold the alleged persons accountable, adding that” forensic evidence is not an agreement as it has not been checked for verification in any way or in any forum.
Under different conditions, it is probable that a person might have signed another signature or inserted the same signature and got a percentage of it wrong given the platform used and such an accusation does not wash and the accusation should be based on a well-executed investigation as such allegation can lead to the arrest of accused persons.’
It should leave no question that you should come out with such a definitive statement and theoretically disqualify a person who holds the fate of the Republic in his possession, “Mr. Abdulai maintained.”