Supreme Court grants BOG's
application
Supreme Court to rule on
counter-motion to Amidu's writ
Set up more specialised
courts, judge
Supreme Court grants BOG's
application
Accra (Greater Accra) 14 February 2001
The Supreme Court on Tuesday set aside a Regional Tribunal order made against the Bank of Ghana (BOG) in respect of two dismissed top officials of the bank for their involvement in a financial scandal.
This followed an ex-parte motion for an order of certiorari filed on the bank's behalf by Mr Yaw Boahene Asare of the Legal Department, urging the court to quash the tribunal's order of July 17, 2000.
On that date, the trial tribunal in the criminal case involving the two bankers ruled that BOG should rescind its decision to dismiss Mr Sebastian Gavor and Justice Ofosu Larbie, former director and deputy director respectively.
Mr Justice Isaac Duose, the presiding judge ordered that the two should rather remain interdicted pending the determination of the case.
The tribunal threatened to cite BOG for contempt if it failed to comply with the directive.
Not satisfied with the tribunal's order, BOG took the matter up at the Supreme Court praying it to nullify the order given by the tribunal.
At its sitting on Tuesday, the seven-member panel of the Supreme Court considered the criminal nature of the case and therefore granted BOG's application.
Mr Justice E K Wiredu was in the chair, with Mrs Justice Joyce Bamford Addo, Mr Justice A B K Ampiah, Mr Justice E D K Adjabeng, Mr. Justice George Acquah, Mr William Atuguba, Ms Sophia Akuffo alongside Mr. George Lamptey as the other panel members.
Mr. Nutifafa Kuenyehia represented BOG while Mr Charles Hayibor and Mrs. Georgina Insaidoo appeared for Gavor and Larbie.
GRi…/
Send your comments to news@ghanareview.com
Supreme Court to rule on
counter-motion to Amidu's writ
Accra (Greater Accra) 14 February 2001
The Supreme Court on Tuesday fixed March 28 for its ruling on a counter motion by Nana Akufo Addo, Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, to an ex-parte motion filed by Mr Martin Alamisi Amidu, former Deputy Attorney-General.
If on that date the court upholds the counter-motion, then it means the substantive one filed by Mr Amidu is dismissed.
On January 29, Mr Amidu filed the writ seeking an interim injunction from the court to restrain the President and four others from continuing to violate the Constitution.
In his statement of claim, Mr Amidu contended that the President, knowing fully well that there was no Council of State, which he ought to have consulted, went ahead and nominated three persons - Mr Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey, General Joshua Hamidu, and Ms Elizabeth Ohene, for various appointments at the presidency.
He said the President's action was unconstitutional, null and void, and urged the court to nullify those appointments.
The former Deputy Attorney-General explained that considering the constitutional nature of the matter, he was compelled to join the AG to the suit.
Basing his argument on Article 57 of the Constitution, Nana Akufo Addo pointed out that, under Section (4) of that article, the President shall be "immune from judicial scrutiny" and insulated from being dragged to court in the course of exercising his executive powers.
This provision, he said, therefore, insulates the President from suits at the law courts as long as remains in office.
Turning to the AG, Nana Akufo Addo said he wondered why Mr Amidu had to make the AG a party to the suit, knowing fully well that before filing his suit on January 29, the ruling New Patriotic Party government had not appointed one.
On Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey and Ms Ohene, Nana Akufo Addo said they were nominated for ministerial appointments and referred to as ministers-designate even before Mr Amidu instituted his action.
"As we sit here now, the processes for their appointments have been completed," he told the nine-member panel.
Replying, Mr Amidu stated that, under Article 2 of the Constitution, the President could be sued.
In the case of the AG, Mr Amidu said the position is a nominal one, and for that matter constitutional matters can be heard even if the position becomes vacant.
He said this is the more reason why he joined the AG to the suit even though at the time of filing the motion, no substantive AG had been appointed.
The court, presided over by the Acting Chief Justice, Mr Justice E. K. Wiredu, had earlier dismissed a preliminary objection raised by Mr Amidu challenging Mr Justice Wiredu's inclusion on the panel.
Mr. Amidu argued that since the Acting Chief Justice asked him to bring his application "on notice" instead of "ex-parte", in his view, he had developed a "personal interest" in the matter.
The former deputy AG said if the Acting Chief Justice is made to sit on the panel, "his deliberate conduct will infringe on my right to justice".
The other panel members were Mrs Joyce Bamford Addo, Mr Justice A. B. K. Ampiah, Mr Justice F. Y. Kpegah, Mr Justice E. D. K. Adjabeng, and Mr Justice
George Acquah.
The rest were Mr Justice William Atuguba, Ms Sophia Akuffo and Mr George Lamptey.
GRi…/
Send your comments to news@ghanareview.com
Set up more specialised
courts, judge
Sunyani (Brong Ahafo) 14 February 2001
Mr. Justice Paul Baffoe Bonnie, presiding high court judge, on Tuesday suggested the opening of more specialised courts in commercial, human rights, copyrights and computer fraud cases to make the judiciary more effective and efficient.
He said that, contrary to what many people might think, civilisation does not erode people's propensity to litigate. Instead, it makes them alive to their rights, hence the continued increase in court cases.
Opening the criminal session of the high court in Sunyani, Mr Justice Bonnie called for the co-operation of lawyers, police, prison officers and jurors in tackling the challenges that face them to make the session a success.
A total of 25 suspects, including a woman, charged with murder, robbery, rape and manslaughter, will be arraigned during the session.
On public criticism of the judiciary, the presiding high court judge stated that while some of these criticisms are honest ones, others are made out of ignorance.
He attributed delays in the judicial process to insufficient courtrooms, inefficient court staff, overburdened and sometimes lazy lawyers and low incentives for judges.
The judiciary is over-staffed, he said, adding that in some situations, one may find five typists in one office with only one typewriter.
The Supervising High Court Judge for Sunyani, Mr Justice Paul K. Gyaesayor, said the courts only interpret the laws as they stand in the statute books, adding that it is not their duty to fill in the gaps in a bad law.
"It is not the duty of the judges to make laws; such jurisdiction is taken away by an act of parliament, and the court cannot do otherwise but apply the law as it stands."
Mr Justice Gyaesayor said it is the duty of parliament to make good laws, which when applied by the courts will yield equally good judgements.
He said that, in spite of the many criticisms, the courts have in no small way helped to move the country forward and ensured peaceful democratic dispensation.
He cited the yeoman's role the courts played in the recent general election, adding: "we should be treated with respect".
He suggested that, in order to speed up the judicial process, an arrangement should be put in place for the courts to summarily try cases on rape, murder and armed robbery.
GRi…/
Send your comments to news@ghanareview.com