Prof. Atuguba, after analyzing nearly 100 political cases presided over by the Supreme Court, found that in cases where the laws aren’t “clear”, the judges usually vote in favour of the political parties that appointed them to the apex court.

[contextly_sidebar id=”JBovWifdP8Gwm96i8Q8sYOOkedpixtqA”]But the Chief Justice Sophia Akuffo and some Supreme Court justices did not take kindly to his research as they openly chastised him.

Sophia Akuffo, said the research was alien to Ghana’s democracy.

“It is an American type of research that you have done…that’s fine, but please be careful what you are importing into our environment… They [Americans] are used to that, we are not. I don’t think there was a single judge who agreed with what you were saying,” she said.

Justice Jones Dotse also said the research was an insult to judges.

But according to Dr. Akumperigya, the comments made by the Justices and their derision of Prof Atuguba’s research is an affront to free speech.

Speaking on The Big Issue on Saturday, Dr. Akumperigya said, the justices could have challenged the findings of the report without criticizing the effort to produce it.

“You may have contrary views on that basis that this is not true or perhaps I didn’t vote this way as your purport that I voted. Our constitution and democracy is premised on free speech and fair comment. If the professor of law faculty cannot do that even against any authority in this country then no one can. What I heard and the exchanges that took place at that forum is an affront to free speech and fair comment. It is that serious,” he said.

Meanwhile, a law lecturer, Professor Kwaku Asare has called on the Justices of the Supreme Court to avoid hurling criticism at Prof. Atuguba over the findings, but rather draw important values from it.

“Rather than play political football with Atuguba’s findings, let us draw the proper policy implications,” he said in Facebook post.

–
By: Caleb Kudah/citifmonline.com/Ghana

The post CJ’s comments on Atuguba’s research ‘affront to free speech’ – Lawyer appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

Martin Amidu, during his vetting, vowed to bring persons who loot the coffers of the nation to book, intimating that not even the President can stop him.

But Dr. Akumperigya explained that Amidu’s task will be a tough one since Ghana’s democracy itself is built on what he termed as “corrupt proceeds.”

[contextly_sidebar id=”n60sMwr3oQILVbElfN4C5ADpmyT5wwIb”]He noted that Amidu would have to fight those who “pull the strings” in a bid to achieve the objectives for which the Special Prosecutor’s Office was established.

Speaking on The Big Issue on Saturday, Mr Akumperigya said fighting corruption will be a daunting task for Mr. Amidu.

The lawyer said the nominee had given the impression during his vetting that “no one is going to interfere with his office including the president but I beg to differ in that regard, he has to be ready.”

“Martin cannot be naïve to think that no one will interfere with his office. He will be tempted. If you look at it from 1992, our Constitutional and multiparty democracy system have been built on corrupt proceeds, most of the party activities especially during general elections, where you require massive resources, where do such resources come from?   If we want to be sincere with ourselves the system itself has been based and financed by pieces of corruption. So he is an individual, he now has the singular opportunity; he’s done it in the past as an individual now he is a public officer. He has to fight this, but he has to be aware that all the political actors and economic interests that prevailed prior to his appointment still prevail,” the lawyer added.

Martin Amidu was vetted by the Appointments Committee last Tuesday, February 15, 2018; an assessment exercise that lasted for over 7 hours.

Mr. Amidu’s public vetting has received widespread commendation as many stakeholders believe he performed creditably.

The Appointments Committee also unanimously recommended his confirmation moments after the grueling exercise.

‘Fear of God’

President Nana Akufo-Addo had said that he appointed Amidu to help put the fear of God in his appointees and public officials.

“I do not expect that he [Martin Amidu] will provide all the answers for dealing with the phenomenon of corruption by public officials, but I do believe that at the least, the office will remove the fear of partisan prosecution and put the fear of God in all public officials who are intending to go on the path of corruption,” he said.

–

By: Godwin Akweiteh Allotey/citifmonline.com/Ghana
Follow @AlloteyGodwin

The post Be ready to fight ‘political mafias’ – Lawyer to Amidu appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

Although he said the Supreme Court’s judgment does not nullify the case, according to the lawyer, the High Court should have been the right place for the case to be litigated because the reliefs sought by the plaintiff did not bother directly on “constitutional matters.”

The Supreme Court on Thursday declared as unconstitutional the requirement by the General Legal Council asking applicants to the Ghana Law School to undertake an examination and subsequent interview before admission.

[contextly_sidebar id=”TVuYwp6XExA3YcOdP53rLBuxBs87YxtB”]According to the court, in a case brought before it by Professor Kwaku Asare, a United States-based Ghanaian lawyer, in 2015, the requirements were in violation of the Legislative Instrument 1296 which gives direction for the mode of admission.

But speaking on Citi FM’s news analysis programme, The Big Issue on Saturday, Lawyer Akumperigya explained that the Supreme Court assumed what he described as a “doubtful jurisdiction” of the case and should have thus relinquished judgment to the high court.

“This is one of the matters the High Court could have assumed proper jurisdiction because to me it borders on administrative law and the use of discretionary power. The High Court is empowered under Article 33 to determine this issue. My view is that the High Court could have assumed proper jurisdiction on this matter and dealt with it,” he added.

“What the Supreme Court did borders on the concept of what we call judicial review so matters of constitutionality, its interpretation and enforcement lies within the remit of the Supreme Court which is why the supreme law of the land confers it with original jurisdiction. So anytime the Supreme Court is exercising its original jurisdiction on matters of constitutionalism, whether it relates to enforcement or interpretation, then they must be matters that flow directly from the constitution itself and not ancillary to it. It’s a general principle of law that if a higher court has jurisdiction on a matter and the lower court also has jurisdiction on the same matter, the higher court should be relinquished for the lower court because obviously matters that are determined at the lower court will eventually will could eventually end up at the higher court,” he added.

Prof. Asare who took the matter to the Supreme Court challenged the legality of the modes of admission used by the Ghana School of Law and argued that the number of people who were admitted into the school was woefully small considering the number of people who possessed LLB from the various universities in the country.

The Ghana Law School has been criticized for being overly rigid considering that it serves 12 schools providing LLB degrees.

The current training regime limits the intake into the Ghana Law School to under 500 of the about 2000 LLB students who graduate annually.

But the Justices in delivering their judgment, also indicated that their order should not take retrospective effect, but should be implemented in six months, when admissions for the 2018 academic year begins.

–

By: Godwin Akweiteh Allotey/citifmonline.com/Ghana
Follow @AlloteyGodwin

The post High Court, not Supreme Court should’ve ruled on Law school case – Lawyer appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.