Zanetor Prays Court To Throw Out Ashietey’s Case

Still on the matter, Klottey Korle’s Zanetor Rawlings and her lawyers are waiting breathlessly in anticipation for the court to rule out the suit filed against her by opponent Nii Ashietey.

Nii Ashietey had lost to her during the National Democratic Congress (NDC) parliamentary primaries for Klottey Korle constituency together with his fellow contender who equally lost to her. They had filed a lawsuit questioning her eligibility. They want the court to declare her ineligible so there can be a re-run of the elections. The youths of Klottey Korle, who felt the suit was uncalled for, had posed a demonstration in an attempt to resist the lawsuits.

See Also: Klottey Korle Youths To Demonstrate Over Suit Against Zanetor

Zanetor and her lawyers, while they await the mandate from the court pray the case is lifted. Her lawyers have asked that the case be lifted, as there are no implicating facts. The case will be re-visited on February 4 which is the date set out for the motion for dismissal of the suit. The court which was presided by Elizabeth Nimako had adjourned the case to allow the plaintiffs inform the Electoral Commission (EC) and the NDC with a hearing notice.

The adjournment had come after the court overruled the plaintiff’s Lawyer’s attempt to summon the EC and NDC to appear in court. The court had overruled this because the EC is obviously part of the suit and hence should be subpoenaed on February 4, when the mandate would be issued.

See Also: Ghanaians Will Do The Ultimate Reshuffle Come November- Bawumia

Court had also ruled out a previous suit filed against Zanetor to annul the results of the parliamentary primaries. The lawyers for the plaintiffs on that case had requested that the EC provide information on when Zanetor’s name was entered on the National Biometric Voters Register; the name of the registration officer; date of registration; the time at which the name was entered on the roll as shown on the printout; the registration centre name and code. The court ruled it out on the basis that the case did not involve a violation of their rights in any way.