{"id":325392,"date":"2017-06-05T06:03:42","date_gmt":"2017-06-05T06:03:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/citifmonline.com\/?p=325392"},"modified":"2017-06-05T06:03:42","modified_gmt":"2017-06-05T06:03:42","slug":"lawyer-sosus-ban-severe-and-excessive-amaliba","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/citifmonline.com\/2017\/06\/lawyer-sosus-ban-severe-and-excessive-amaliba\/","title":{"rendered":"Lawyer Sosu\u2019s ban severe and excessive \u2013 Amaliba"},"content":{"rendered":"
A member of the legal team of the National Democratic Congress, lawyer Abraham Amaliba, has said the legal General Legal Council\u2019s 3-year-ban imposed on renowned human rights lawyer, Francis Xavier-Sosu, is \u201cexcessive\u201d and \u201cso severe.\u201d<\/p>\n
According to him, the supposed crime does not correspond with the punishment meted out to him by the Council.<\/p>\n
[contextly_sidebar id=”fDLuVkQo3mLg2IoTqT1zht3K01Wt2tKv”]\u00a0The General Legal Council (GLC) in a letter announced\u00a0that it had slapped the ban on lawyer Sosu for \u00a0\u2018overcharging\u2019 a client<\/a>\u00a0<\/span><\/strong>and\u00a0also for\u00a0<\/span><\/span>advertising his service on Facebook.<\/span><\/p>\n But lawyer Amaliba noted that, in cases of this nature, some lawyers were made to refund the excess payment but not banned.<\/p>\n \u201cThe punishment for that offence of overcharging and touting is so severe and it is excessive. Your punishment must correspond with your crime. And I think that there are other cases in which some lawyers were asked to refund the money that the committee had claimed that they had overcharged. And I think that much as he pleaded guilty, the punishment for me is harsh,” he said.<\/p>\n Mr. Amaliba told\u00a0Citi News<\/strong>\u00a0 steps are being taken to\u00a0ensure that he\u00a0appeals the decision today [Monday].<\/p>\n “On Monday, there are steps that are being taken to ensure that he files an appeal,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n According to the General Legal Council, lawyer Sosu charged his client GH\u00a250,000, which was \u201cexcessive\u201d and an \u201coverestimation\u201d for the services rendered to the client in a human right case that saw the client receive a compensation of GH\u00a2 200,000, although he [Sosu] had told the client he was offering his legal services for free.<\/p>\n