The seven-member panel of judges, presided over by Justice Sophia Adinyira, openly chided the lawyers, stating that they had failed to file their memorandum of issues a year after they were ordered to do so.

The lawyers in response cited circumstances beyond their control as being responsible for the delay.

[contextly_sidebar id=”nO2qP8XyhIkRaGkoIK1DyqDXY6yDoBR9″]The consolidated suit was filed by three plaintiffs namely Nana Asante Bediatuo, Elikplim Agbemeva and Alfred Yeboah against the Attorney General.

The plaintiffs contend that the President cannot assume powers exclusively held by the Judiciary under the constitution of Ghana.

They are also pleading with the court to declare as null and void, the remission of the punishment by then President Mahama of a four-month jail term imposed on Alistair Nelson, Godwin Ako Gunn and Salifu Masse.

The Montie 3, as they became widely known, were jailed on July 27, 2016 after they threatened to kill some judges on a political talk show on Accra-based Montie FM.

Mugabe and his two panelists were sentenced to serve four months in jail but former President John Mahama on August 22, 2016, remitted the four-month prison sentence handed to the three.

John Mahama took the decision after receiving a petition signed by top government officials and National Democratic Congress (NDC) functionaries.

It is believed that the number of top officials in his government who signed the petition compelled him to take the decision to pardon the three who were affiliated to the ruling party at the time.

The former president’s decision evoked outrage across the nation with many criticizing him for setting a bad precedent and undermining the judiciary.

–

By: Fred Djabonor/citifmonline.com/Ghana

The post Plaintiffs slammed for delaying suit against Montie 3’s pardon appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

According to the Justices of the Supreme Court, the High Court judge erred in granting the order of mandamus compelling the Immigration Service to provide the permit.

[contextly_sidebar id=”BvLwu4vaR3NxdDJqEXeOIBuBUDQZlNJj”]They also indicated that the judge exceeded her jurisdiction.

This follows a suit filed by the state seeking to overturn the orders of the High Court which directed the Comptroller of the Ghana Immigration Service to restore the Indian businessman’s residence and work permits.

The Justices also added that the court could not give the Immigration Service such an order in this situation given that the businessman had not gone through the administrative process of getting the revocation of his permits addressed.

Background

The GIS, following an order by the Interior Ministry in June 2017, deported Mr. Sivaram on the premise that he had forged his marriage certificate in an application for citizenship, which led his lawyer to contest his deportation by seeking judicial review.

The High Court, which first heard the case, upheld the businessman’s application and quashed his deportation order on July 31 on the grounds that the Interior Minister exceeded his jurisdiction.

The applicant, after the failure of the GIS to comply with the first order, sought an order from the court in September the same year to compel them to comply with the first order.

The High Court once again ordered the GIS to restore the Residence and Work Permit of Mr. Sivaram, the Indian businessman within seven days and also ordered the GIS’s assigns, agents and servants to desist from harassing him until his application before the Service was duly processed.

The GIS, represented by the Attorney General’s office, after the second case, filed a stay of proceedings at the High Court which was subsequently dismissed.

They went ahead to appeal the ruling in the Court of Appeal which was also dismissed leading to today [Thursday]’s case at the Supreme Court.

–

By: Fred Djabanor/citifmonline.com/Ghana

The post Supreme Court quashes restoration of Indian businessman’s permits appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

“I have given Mr. President my word of honour that I will discharge the duties of the burdensome you have entrusted to my care with similar integrity and honour with your support. Mr. President, I want to assure you that the propaganda about witch-hunting will not daunt me from prosecuting all corruption crimes without reference to political considerations…I will treat crime as crime and nothing else,” he assured.

Mr. Amidu gave the assurance today, Friday, February 23, 2018, when he was sworn into office as Ghana’s first Special Prosecutor by President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo at the Flagstaff House.

On the case at the Supreme Court challenging his eligibility for the position because of his age, the Special Prosecutor said he has not received any lawsuit to that effect, hence nothing bars him from accepting the job he described as “burdensome.”

“I wish the public to know that nobody has served me personally with any writ or statement of case or injunction challenging my nomination, approval and appointment so as to restrain me from accepting this appointment,” he added.

Martin Amidu was vetted by the Appointments Committee on February 15, 2018; an assessment exercise that lasted 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 its grueling 7-hour public hearing exercise.

He was subsequently approved by Parliament last Tuesday.

A day before the vetting a suit was filed at the Supreme Court by Deputy Minority Ranking Member on Constitutional Affairs, Dr. Dominic Ayine, who is seeking a declaration that Mr. Amidu, who is 66-years-old, cannot hold public office because he has exceeded the mandated age limit per the 1992 constitution.

Again, Dr. Ayine prior to Mr. Amidu’s approval in Parliament on Tuesday further asked the law making body to put the process on hold, as his suit is still pending at the Supreme Court.

But his call was ignored by the Speaker of Parliament.

About Martin Amidu

Martin A. B. K. Amidu was the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice from January 2011 till January 2012 under the late President John Evans Atta-Mills.

Amidu, a member of the NDC, served as the Deputy Attorney-General for about the last four years of the Provisional National Defence Council military government.

After civilian rule was established in the Fourth Republic in January 1993, he continued to serve in the government of Jerry Rawlings as Deputy Attorney-General. This he did for both terms lasting eight years until January 2001.

In the December 2000 presidential elections, he stood as the running mate of John Atta Mills. They both however lost to President John Kufuor that year.

In January 2010, following a cabinet reshuffle, President Mills replaced Cletus Avoka with Martin Amidu as the Minister for Interior. As Amidu is a Builsa, some people raised questions as to his neutrality in dealing with the Bawku conflict. He, however, went successfully through vetting by the Parliament of Ghana and has since assumed his post.

Following the second major cabinet reshuffle by President Mills, Amidu became the Attorney general and Minister for Justice of Ghana.

–

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

The post ‘Witch-hunting propaganda won’t stop me’ – Amidu appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

The case was sent to the Supreme Court by the late Nakpaa Naa Salifu Dawuni after the National House of Chiefs ruled against him at Kumasi in the Ashanti Region.

Bimbilla, over the last 15 years, has been engulfed in a chieftaincy conflict which has led to clashes between the various factions and has claimed over forty lives, including women and children.

IN an attack on some known sitting places where six persons were shot and killed.

Background

[contextly_sidebar id=”SWXBmmd5fKsUG7ZvS9rcdBm0U6Ctg1y7″]The decision on who is the rightful Overlord of Bimbilla has been in dispute for years, prompting the claimants to appeal to the National House of Chiefs for adjudication.

This was after several failed attempts to get the Northern Regional House of Chiefs to rule in their favour.

The claimants; the late Naa Salifu Dawuni, appealed against the ruling of the Northern regional House of Chiefs that affirmed Naa Dasana Andani II as the overlord of Bimbila.

Subsequently, Naa Dasana Andani Yakubu II was murdered by unknown assailants, while the case was pending at the National House of Chiefs.

The murder of the overlord led to some unrest in the area and the developments compelled the Minister of Interior to impose a 12-hour curfew on the town.

However, the Regional House of Chiefs in their ruling in October 2014 declared the late Naa Dasana Andani Yakubu II as the rightful heir.

The Naakpa Naa faction however decided to head to the Supreme Court to seek finality on the matter.

Delay in ruling on Bimbilla chieftaincy case causing tension – Peace Council

The Northern Regional Executive Secretary for the National Peace Council, Father Thaddeus Kuusah, on December 2017 complained that there was heightened tension in the Bimbilla area blaming attributing it to the delay in the Supreme Court ruling.

“It is not healthy because of the expectations, people are very confident, they are expecting that the ruling may go their favour and once the ruling comes, the dust will begin to settle. So whichever way it goes, I believe it will work. We need to keep reminding them that further delay is also causing a lot of anxiety in the area so if it is within their time frame to come out with the review as soon as possible it will help,” he added during a workshop held in the area.

–

By: Godwin A. Allotey & Mohammed Aminu M. Alabira/citifmonline.com/Ghana
Follow @AlloteyGodwin

The post Bimbilla chieftaincy dispute: Supreme Court hearing begins Feb. 13 appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

The three-member panel presided over by Justice William Atuguba, threw out the application for lack of merit, and described it as a red herring introduced as a further illustration of Mr. Woyome’s ‘delay tactics.’

[contextly_sidebar id=”eMVJYQuFCYhwExQVAy72ux4TKUdTvped”]Mr. Woyome’s lawyers argued that the decision to orally examine him, breached his rights to privacy, and further challenged the capacity of Justice Benin to make the order.

Mr. Woyome has filed multiple suits since the beginning of his oral examination by the Attorney General in June 2017, to stall attempts by the state to retrieve the GHc 51 million.

In November 2017, Mr. Woyome filed a suit at the Supreme Court seeking to halt all processes intended to retrieve the GHc51 million judgment debt wrongfully paid to him by the state.

He prayed the court to put on hold all processes to reclaim the money, until a determination of another related case being heard at the African Court of Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR) in Tanzania.

This was after the African Court on November 24, 2017, ordered Ghana to suspend all efforts to retrieve the money, until it determines an appeal filed by Woyome, who argued that his human rights are being abused by Ghana’s Supreme Court.

But the Supreme Court, in making a determination on a similar application filed by Woyome for stay of proceedings pending the final outcome of the case before the African Court, argued that there was no real factual and legal basis for it to share its powers and jurisdiction with any other court, and so it cannot be compelled to halt the ongoing proceedings.

Background

Mr. Woyome was paid the GHc 51 million after claiming he helped Ghana raise funds to construct stadia for the hosting of the 2008 African Cup of Nations.

However, an Auditor General’s report released in 2010, held that the amount was paid illegally to him.

Subsequently, the Supreme Court in 2014 ordered Mr. Woyome to pay back the money, after Martin Amidu, the Special Prosecutor nominee and a private legal practitioner at the time, challenged the legality of the payments.

Following delays in retrieving the money, Supreme Court judges unanimously granted the Attorney General clearance to execute the court’s judgment, ordering Mr. Woyome to refund the cash to the state.

There had been previous attempts to orally examine Mr. Woyome, with Mr. Amidu himself, in 2016, filing an application at the Supreme Court to find out how the businessman was going to pay back the money.

This came after the Attorney General’s office under the Mahama Administration, and led by the former Minister for Justice, Marietta Brew Appiah-Oppong, discontinued a similar application.

In February 2017 however, Mr. Amidu withdrew his suit seeking an oral examination, explaining that the change of government and the assurance by the new Attorney General to retrieve all judgment debts wrongfully paid to individuals, had given him renewed confidence in the system.

–

By: Fred Djabanor/citifmonline.com/Ghana

The post Woyome’s oral examination to continue – Supreme Court orders appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

Following the October 10 election that ended with none of the candidates able to amass the over 50 percent of votes quota needed to become President, the two frontrunners Ex-football star George Weah, and Vice-President Joseph Boakai, were set to face off in a run-off on November 7.

[contextly_sidebar id=”j7JxVSqFO1V8cVnM52kETde9PBW1R4vQ”]However, after allegations of fraud were made by Charles Brumskine, who finished third in the polls, the country’s Supreme Court put the run-off on hold until the Electoral Commission completes their investigation of the claims.

The National Elections Commission (NEC), has since ended their probe, but the Supreme Court is now hearing an appeal lodged by the Liberty Party and the Unity Party against the outcome of the investigation, with a ruling expected on Thursday.

The investigation by the National Elections Commission concluded that, irregularities did not affect the outcome of the first round, a conclusion being disputed by the two parties.

With the country on the verge of its first peaceful handover of power from one democratically elected leader to another in 73 years, President Akufo-Addo called on the Supreme Court to help usher in a new era for the West African country.

“We believe work that has been done to stabilize Liberia by Ellen Johnson Sirleaf has been very solid. I’m anticipating that at the end of the day, Liberia’s institutions, the Supreme Court and the Electoral Commission will be up to the task and be able to shepherd the country to a successful transition,” he said at the Flagstaff House after the new Liberian Ambassador to Ghana Madam Genevieve Kennedy called on him.

‘Turmoil and hope’

Liberia, which was founded by freed US slaves in the 19th Century, has not had a smooth transfer of power in 73 years.

Ms Sirleaf took office in 2006, after her predecessor, Charles Taylor, was forced out of office by rebels in 2003, ending a long civil war.

Taylor is currently serving a 50-year prison sentence in the UK for war crimes related to the conflict in neighbouring Sierra Leone.

Mr. Weah, 51, has chosen Taylor’s ex-wife Jewel Howard Taylor as his running mate.

–

By: Edwin Kwakofi/citifmonline.com/Ghana

The post Nana Addo sure of successful transition in Liberia despite election uncertainty appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

The African Court on November 24, 2017, ordered Ghana to suspend all efforts to retrieve the money until it determines an appeal filed by Woyome, who argued that his human rights are being abused by Ghana’s Supreme Court.

But the five-member panel of Justices at the Supreme Court in making a determination on a similar application filed by Woyome for stay of proceedings pending the final outcome of the case before the African Court, argued that there was no real factual and legal basis for the Supreme Court to share its powers and jurisdiction with any other court, and so it cannot be compelled to halt the ongoing proceedings.

[contextly_sidebar id=”YbcJYmSRfeRkVC02my8iPf633AyD37Pf”]The Supreme Court thus dismissed Mr. Woyome’s application for stay of proceedings, pending the final outcome of the case before the African Court, describing it as one without merit.

Speaking to the media after the ruling, a Deputy Attorney General, Godfred Dame, said the Supreme Court has done what is needful because any contrary decision would have would have promoted “discrimination.”

“If indeed this ruling [The ruling of the African Court] is made to stand, then it means it is promoting discrimination,” he added.

Mr. Dame said he was surprised by the order by the African Court since government had no representation when the order was given.

“…The ruling of the African Court came as a surprise to us…there was no hearing or notification to us on the proceeding. All that had been done was a motion filed by them and we had also filed our affidavit in opposition, and then there were no further representations whatsoever. So it actually came out of the blue and even when you look at the ruling, it is indicated that they were represented and we were not represented. So how come they were represented and we were represented? We think that something went amiss, something fishy occurred, but of course we’ve crossed the barrier, the Supreme Court has done what is needed and we are really satisfied,” he added.

Ghana has not incorporated African court treaty

On the implications of rejecting the African Court’s order, Mr. Dame explained that, although Ghana’s Parliament has ratified the protocol setting up the African Court, it has not been incorporated into the country’s laws hence Ghana was not bound to obey the order.

“As the court indicated, and I indicated in my submission also, it is the constitution of the Republic of Ghana that is paramount. The government of Ghana is required to comply with laws set out in article 11, and on top of that law, is the constitution of Ghana. And in the same constitution it makes the Supreme Court solely and exclusively responsible for the adjudication of constitutional matters. So that, sole and exclusive duties of the Supreme Court on constitutional matters are not shared with any court whether local or foreign. And the same constitution in article 2 clause 3 and 4, also directs that any decision and order of the Supreme Court must be duly obeyed and carried out.”

“Even the African Court of Human Rights itself, the protocol for the establishment of the court must have been specifically incorporated into the domestic laws of Ghana, and processes will require an act of Parliament…but this is non-existent,” Mr. Dame explained.

He also rejected claims that the decision by Ghana’s Supreme Court will mar the country’s relations on the African stage.

Genesis of Woyome’s woes

Mr. Woyome was paid the GHc 51 million after claiming he helped Ghana raise funds to construct stadia for the hosting of the 2008 African Cup of Nations.

However, an Auditor General’s report released in 2010, held that the amount was paid illegally to him.

Subsequently, the Supreme Court in 2014 ordered Mr. Woyome to pay back the money, after Martin Amidu, a private legal practitioner challenged the legality of the payments.

Following delays in retrieving the money, Supreme Court judges unanimously granted the Attorney General clearance to execute the court’s judgment, ordering Mr. Woyome to refund the cash to the state.

There had been previous attempts to orally examine Mr. Woyome, with Mr. Amidu himself, in 2016, filing an application at the Supreme Court to find out how the businessman was going to pay back the money.

This came after the Attorney General’s office under the Mahama Administration, led by the former Minister for Justice, Marietta Brew Appiah-Oppong, discontinued a similar application.

In February 2017 however, Mr. Amidu withdrew his suit seeking an oral examination, explaining that the change of government and the assurance by the new Attorney General to retrieve all judgment debts wrongfully paid to individuals, had given him renewed confidence in the system.

Woyome runs to African court after ICC rejection

Alfred Agbesie Woyome proceeded to the African Human Rights Court in August 2017, when the government began a valuation of his properties in an attempt to retrieve Ghc51 million wrongfully paid to him in a judgement debt.

The application at the ACHPR in August 2017, was in response to the Supreme Court’s judgement on July 29, 2014 that ordered him to pay the GH₵51.2 million on the grounds that he got the money out of unconstitutional and invalid contracts between the state and Waterville Holdings Limited in 2006 for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008.

This was after a similar case he filed at the International Chamber of Commerce had been dismissed.

He alleged in his application that Ghana did not respect the terms of the agreement that governed the financial engineering role he played in the transaction, and as such his rights and freedoms recognized under the ACHPR Charter had been violated.

He prayed the ACHPR to halt all processes seeking to execute the Supreme Court’s July 29, 2014 judgement, until his case was determined by the ACHPR.

–

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

The post Supreme Court right for ‘ignoring’ African Court in Woyome case – Dame appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

According to the decision by a five-member panel of justices, there’s no real factual and legal basis for Ghana’s Supreme Court to share its powers and jurisdiction with any other court, and so it cannot be compelled to halt the ongoing proceedings.

[contextly_sidebar id=”84hRz78uDv4q57LMLLTw2kW2mO1TOZA0″]The African Court on Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR) ordered Ghana to suspend all efforts to retrieve the GH₵51.2 million, until the Court determines an appeal filed by the businessman, who argued that his human rights are being abused by Ghana’s Supreme Court.

In a unanimous ruling, the 11-member panel of the African Court, ordered Ghana to suspend the seizure of any property belonging to the businessman and “take all appropriate measures to maintain the status quo and avoid the property being sold’’ until the case was determined.

But the Ghanaian justices, after rejecting the African Court’s order, further went on to dismiss Mr. Woyome’s application for stay of proceedings pending the final outcome of the case before the African Court, describing it as one without merit.

Background

Mr. Woyome was paid the GHc 51 million after claiming he helped Ghana raise funds to construct stadia for the hosting of the 2008 African Cup of Nations.

However, an Auditor General’s report released in 2010, held that the amount was paid illegally to him.

Subsequently, the Supreme Court in 2014 ordered Mr. Woyome to pay back the money, after Martin Amidu, a private legal practitioner challenged the legality of the payments.

Following delays in retrieving the money, Supreme Court judges unanimously granted the Attorney General clearance to execute the court’s judgment, ordering Mr. Woyome to refund the cash to the state.

There had been previous attempts to orally examine Mr. Woyome, with Mr. Amidu himself, in 2016, filing an application at the Supreme Court to find out how the businessman was going to pay back the money.

This came after the Attorney General’s office under the Mahama Administration, led by the former Minister for Justice, Marietta Brew Appiah-Oppong, discontinued a similar application.

In February 2017 however, Mr. Amidu withdrew his suit seeking an oral examination, explaining that the change of government and the assurance by the new Attorney General to retrieve all judgment debts wrongfully paid to individuals, had given him renewed confidence in the system.

Woyome runs to African court after ICC rejection

Alfred Agbesie Woyome proceeded to the African Human Rights Court in August 2017, when the government began a valuation of his properties in an attempt to retrieve Ghc51 million wrongfully paid to him in a judgement debt.

The application at the ACHPR in August 2017, was in response to the Supreme Court’s judgement on July 29, 2014 that ordered him to pay the GH₵51.2 million on the grounds that he got the money out of unconstitutional and invalid contracts between the state and Waterville Holdings Limited in 2006 for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008.

This was after a similar case he filed at the International Chamber of Commerce had been dismissed.

He alleged in his application that Ghana did not respect the terms of the agreement that governed the financial engineering role he played in the transaction, and as such his rights and freedoms recognized under the ACHPR Charter had been violated.

He prayed the ACHPR to halt all processes seeking to execute the Supreme Court’s July 29, 2014 judgement, until his case was determined by the ACHPR.

–

By: Fred Djabanor & Ebenezer Afanyi Dadzie/citifmonline.com/Ghana

The post Ghana’s Supreme Court rejects African Court ruling on Woyome appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

This follows the Minority’s firm admonition to government to withdraw the budget during the first day of debate, because they claim the Finance Minister reviewed aspects of the last budget in July without a resolution of the house; an act they term unlawful and must lead to nullification of the 2018 budget.

The Chairman of Parliament’s Finance Committee, Dr. Mark Assibey Yeboah however argued that the Minority will be doing a disservice to the country if they debate the budget without seeking clarity in the courts regarding the supposed illegality with the budget.

“When we pass an appropriation, we say that ‘spending not exceeding’, meaning the Minister of Finance can spend up to the appropriation, so if it is that he does not spend up to appropriation does he have to come back to Parliament ? No! If it were the case that he exceeds the appropriation, then he has to come back to Parliament, but he has not exceeded the appropriation. In the mid year review on 31st July, we decided that it is a statement and should not come by way of motion, but if he [Ato Forson] is saying that it was unconstitutional and he has stayed all this while waiting for a budget before, then you are doing a disservice to the nation, and the proper forum to test that one is the Supreme Court. ”

Meanwhile, the Minority Spokesperson on Finance, Cassiel Ato Forson, has been making the case of the Minority as to why the budget is illegal and should be withdrawn.

He stated that, government had reviewed some key economic targets without recourse to the House, adding that “the Minister responsible for Finance cannot revise the expenditures and revenue without parliamentary resolution.”

Minority’s call for budget withdrawal flawed – Kwaku Kwarteng

But Deputy Minister of Finance, Mr. Kwaku Kwarteng however dismissed these suggestions on Eyewitness News, saying the Minority’s argument is flawed since government cannot premise its budget on the previous one passed by Parliament while ignoring the realities on the ground.

“The point that we should have rather premised the 2018 budget on the 2017 budget passed by Parliament and we should have ignored the realities and we should have not built future plans on the basis of today’s actuals is a very strange proposition.

“ You do your budget on the basis of ‘actuals’ because going forward, you want to plan on the basis of reality so for anyone to suggest that because you did midyear review and Parliament did not approve of it, then you are unable to do 2018 budget statement because you would have premised it on the mid year review projections is flawed,” Mr. Kwarteng argued.

–

By: Marian Ansah & Duke Mensah Opoku/citifmonline.com/Ghana
Follow @EfeAnsah

The post You can go to court over 2018 budget – Majority dares Minority appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.

This is the sixth application he has filed since the beginning of his oral examination by the Attorney General.

Mr. Woyome is praying the court to put on hold all processes to reclaim the money from him until a determination of another related case being heard at the African court.

[contextly_sidebar id=”R0uYWplvicBzjnKdUJzyHZvlYEML20aX”]Mr. Woyome, who was expected to continue with the oral examination on how he intends to re-pay the judgment debt, did not show up court in court today, Monday, claiming that he is unwell.

The Supreme Court on October 20, 2017, dismissed an application by Mr. Woyome, which sought to stop the seizure and valuation of his properties by the state.

The Supreme Court made the ruling in an application he had filed to stop the government from continuing with moves to seize and value his properties.

His application followed state officials storming one of his residences at Trasacco to value the property.

The court presided over by a sole judge, Justice Alfred Benin, described the application as one without merit hence his decision.

The ruling by the court paved way for the state to continue with the valuation of the properties of Mr. Woyome in its quest to retrieve the monies he owes the state.

–

By: Fred Djabanor/citifmonline.com/Ghana

The post Woyome ‘runs’ to Supreme Court for cover appeared first on Citi 97.3 FM - Relevant Radio. Always.