Oh first, didn’t Balaam resist? But yielding to the flesh, even against the commandment of God; Of conscience;
And of what he knew in his heart to be accurate;
Balam eventually gave in to the inducements of Balak. And in so doing, he missed the very signs prompting to ‘pause, think, consider.’ He missed the warning from his favorite donkey, who on this trip just wouldn’t budge- even after the usual doses of beating-.
The very sign that eventually saved his life. In the end, Balaam, against the instructions and desires of Balak, could not speak against the testimony of truth.
The ‘Prophet’ Asiedu Balaam, instructed to testify to the petition has made some rather exciting admissions which may not please his instructing ‘King’. Of course, being a law-abiding citizen, I cannot draw any inferences from these admissions, as that is for the Court. But I can present these admissions to you, and you will be entitled to make what you can out of it.
Prophet Asiedu Balaam told the Court that the petitioner appointed two agents for each polling station in the country and at every polling station, assigned 275 agents including lawyers who were given sufficient training by the petitioner. It wasn’t surprising then when he conceded the Court might rightly draw an inference based on his answers that all his party agents had THEIR FORM 10.
The Court could do this because he trained them on their entitlement to form 10 whether they signed or not at the constituency level. The EC then transmitted the certified documents to the regional level. Agents of the petitioner then signed 13 out of the 16 summary sheets. He further said even in the Regions where his agent had failed to sign; the NDC had won those regions though are disputing those results so he cannot say for sure who had won. Nonetheless, where the petitioner’s agents did sign to certify the results.
They did declare by signing that: ‘we the undersign do hereby declare that the results shown above are an accurate account of the ballot in the region.’
Prophet Asiedu Balaam went further to say at the National Collation Center, their two representatives, including Mr. Mettle-Nunoo.
He was a former deputy minister and had litigated two electoral disputes in the Supreme Court.
To be fair to Mr. Nketia, he said he couldn’t admit nor deny if Rojo had signed 12 of the 13 summary sheets signed by their agents. And then his own document, a document he himself brought to Court and presented to the judges, that document would show his petitioner lost and the second respondent won.
Prophet Balaam Nketia said the 4000 figure they had brought to suggest voter padding was just a sample on the issue of vote padding. He probably intended the Court to fish for the rest because they presented no evidence to show this padding’s exact scale or its actual effect on the election results.
When it was put to him by lawyers for the EC that he had no evidence to support voter padding, Prophet Nketia said ‘My Lord we are not in Court to try to declare another Presidential result by us. We are in Court to challenge the constitutional duty of the first respondent and to see whether that duty has been discharged faithfully.’
As promised, I won’t comment on the prophecies of Asiedu Nketia Balaam. But the reader may be guided reading Article 2 of the Constitution of Ghana and the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court triggered by the NDC in this petition.
But I can comment on the striking similarities when you read of a prophet so obstinate as to ignore the warnings of a talking donkey and a man, in 2021, with cherished supporters, persisting in a course doomed to failure and with all signs gloriously telling. I can comment on a petition made public for us to read and consume.
And which read and consumed would at once show a petition confused as to its purpose, evil in its declarations and affirmations while betraying at every relevant time a hatched plan to set up the honorable Supreme Court of Ghana for mischief. Mischief intended through misdirected, misguided, and misconceived advocacy.
A petition confused as to its purpose, dishonest as to its goal, and adjudicated by a lawyer more interested in lecturing than doing the business of an advocate, which is to prove, persuade, or prove by persuading.
I do not contest it, nor dispute that where the law lies on the testimony of Mr. Asiedu Nketia and every issue in the petition, is the judges’ bosom. It is for the judges to test the relevancy of the evidence and the credibility of Mr. Asiedu Nketia.
It is also not challenged in the end what they say is what will matter. But your liberty to follow the facts and to use your own senses as unsworn jurors in this trial is not taken away from you as members of the public. And in exercising that, you may make of Asiedu’s prophecy what you can in light of the details in the petition as you know them. You may then see as I saw, the Balaam in Asiedu Nketia.