AN Accra High Court has fixed December 19, 2007, for the hearing of a motion for an order of interlocutory injunction filed by the Democratic People’s Party (DPP) against the four political parties with representation in Parliament and the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) for violating the Political Parties Law relating to the foreign funding of political parties.
The court on Monday took a very serious view of the matter and stated that the defendants were being given the chance to appear in court on the next adjourned date.
The matter was adjourned after a former General Secretary of the PNC, Mr Gabriel Pwamang who was in court had prayed for an adjournment because the defendants had not filed their affidavits in opposition although they had entered appearance.
The DPP said that the Dutch-IMD- IEA funding for the New Patriotic Party (NPP), National Democratic Congress (NDC), People’s National Convention (PNC) and the Convention People’s Party (CPP) was illegal and unlawful as it violates section 24 and 25 of the Political Parties Law 2000, Act 574.
It said that there were 10 registered political parties in Ghana whose activities were governed by the political parties law section 23 of which states that only citizens of Ghana may contribute in cash or kind of funds of a political party.
The section further states that a firm, partnership or enterprise owned by a citizen or a company registered under the laws of Ghana at least 75 per cent of whose capital was owned by citizen was for the purposes of the Act a citizen.
Section 24 of the Act states that a non-citizen shall not directly or indirectly make a contribution or donation or loan whether in cash or in kind to the funds held by or for the benefit of a political party shall be demand or accept a contribution, donation or loan from a non-citizen.
The DPP is seeking for an order of interlocutory injunction against the defendants to suspend with immediate effect further operations of the Dutch-IMD- IEA programme for the funding of the parties because the programme introduced discrimination into the multiparty system and destroyed the level playing field component of democracy.
It is also seeking an order to enable the defendants to refund all the moneys paid to them under the programme or faced sanctions which could include being restrained from taking part in further elections.
Furthermore, the plaintiff is seeking an order to enable the defendants to furnish the court with all records on the operations of the Dutch IMD-IEA funding scheme, especially records on moneys paid or spent and received by the four political parties.
According to the DPP, the moneys should be refunded to the Electoral Commission (EC) in accordance with the requirement of Section 25 (c) of the political party law.
In an affidavit to support the motion, the DPP said that since 2002, the NPP had sought to exhaust every internal channels of redress against the decision of the Dutch NGO to extend financial assistance to the four political parties in breach of the law.
According to the DPP, section 25 of the Act stipulated that when any person contravened sections 23 and 24, in addition to any penalty that might be imposed under the Act, any amount whether in cash or in kind shall be forfeited to the state and the amount shall be recovered from the political party as a debt owed the state.
It said that in spite of the firm provisions debarring foreign bodies from giving financial assistance directly or indirectly to political parties, the Dutch NGO reached an agreement with the IEA by which the four political parties were given assistance in cash and kind to the detriment of the other political parties, thereby creating an uneven playing field in the political arena in contravention of the law.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
PRESEC BURSER REMANDED
Story: Stephen Sah
THE Accra Circuit Court has remanded the Immediate Past Bursar of the Presbyterian Boys' Secondary School (PRESEC), Legon, Mr Gyeni Sampong, for allegedly stealing more than GH¢200,000 (¢2 billion) belonging to the school.
Mr Sampong, who is facing one count of stealing public property, will appear again on December 18, 2007, by which time investigations into the matter might have been completed.
His plea was not taken.
According to the facts of the case, as narrated to the court by Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Abichab Boye, the Director-General of the Ghana Education Service (GES) made a report to the Greater Accra Regional Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service and Mr Sampong was arrested.
After preliminary investigations, he was charged and arraigned.
The prosecutor said in a hand-written letter to the Audit Report Implementation Committee (ARIC) of the GES, Mr Sampong accepted the findings of an audit team which he had up till then rejected and promised to refund the money.
The letter, he said, was co-signed by Mr Joseph Jecty Asare, the Immediate Past Headmaster, as a witness, and the former bursar proposed to pay the money in instalments, starting with a ¢70 million down payment at the end of November. After that, he was to pay ¢10 million every month.
He said following allegations of impropriety against the bursar, the GES set up a committee of inquiry to probe the affairs of the school.
After preliminary investigations, the committee, which was chaired by Mr Charles Antwi Konadu, a Deputy Chief Internal Auditor of the GES, recommended, among others, that the school's accounts be audited from the 2002/2003 academic year to August 2006.
Other recommendations of the committee, which was commissioned by the then Director of Education for the Greater Accra Region, Mrs Akosua Adu, included the transfer of the bursar and the redeployment of the headmaster.
DSP Boye said the audit report on the accounts of the school was completed and inaugurated on December 27, 2006 by Mr J. M. Quao, the Chief Internal Auditor of the GES.
The report, he said, concluded that "the bursar succeeded in wilfully suppressing revenue to the tune of ¢2,030,942,525.00, resulting in cash flow problems in the school”.
It, therefore, recommended that the amount be retrieved in full from the bursar and paid to the school's bank account and appropriate disciplinary action taken against Mr Sampong.
THE Accra Circuit Court has remanded the Immediate Past Bursar of the Presbyterian Boys' Secondary School (PRESEC), Legon, Mr Gyeni Sampong, for allegedly stealing more than GH¢200,000 (¢2 billion) belonging to the school.
Mr Sampong, who is facing one count of stealing public property, will appear again on December 18, 2007, by which time investigations into the matter might have been completed.
His plea was not taken.
According to the facts of the case, as narrated to the court by Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Abichab Boye, the Director-General of the Ghana Education Service (GES) made a report to the Greater Accra Regional Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service and Mr Sampong was arrested.
After preliminary investigations, he was charged and arraigned.
The prosecutor said in a hand-written letter to the Audit Report Implementation Committee (ARIC) of the GES, Mr Sampong accepted the findings of an audit team which he had up till then rejected and promised to refund the money.
The letter, he said, was co-signed by Mr Joseph Jecty Asare, the Immediate Past Headmaster, as a witness, and the former bursar proposed to pay the money in instalments, starting with a ¢70 million down payment at the end of November. After that, he was to pay ¢10 million every month.
He said following allegations of impropriety against the bursar, the GES set up a committee of inquiry to probe the affairs of the school.
After preliminary investigations, the committee, which was chaired by Mr Charles Antwi Konadu, a Deputy Chief Internal Auditor of the GES, recommended, among others, that the school's accounts be audited from the 2002/2003 academic year to August 2006.
Other recommendations of the committee, which was commissioned by the then Director of Education for the Greater Accra Region, Mrs Akosua Adu, included the transfer of the bursar and the redeployment of the headmaster.
DSP Boye said the audit report on the accounts of the school was completed and inaugurated on December 27, 2006 by Mr J. M. Quao, the Chief Internal Auditor of the GES.
The report, he said, concluded that "the bursar succeeded in wilfully suppressing revenue to the tune of ¢2,030,942,525.00, resulting in cash flow problems in the school”.
It, therefore, recommended that the amount be retrieved in full from the bursar and paid to the school's bank account and appropriate disciplinary action taken against Mr Sampong.
A-G'S RETIRING AGE NOW BEFORE SUPREME COURT
(A - G’s retiring age now before Supreme Court)
THE controversy over the retiring age and the continued stay in office of the Auditor General, Mr Dua Agyeman, is now a matter before the Supreme Court.
Consequently, the Accra Fast Track High Court, which was hearing a writ filed by Mr Johnson Asiedu-Nketia, General Secretary of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) challenging the continued stay in office of Mr Agyeman has adjourned the matter sine die.
The court adjourned the matter after it granted an application by the Attorney-General praying for the adjournment because the matter had been referred to the Supreme Court for interpretation by a Member of Parliament (MP), Mr P. C. Ofori Appiah.
For the MP, the Auditor General is not a public officer appointed under Article 70 of the constitution so as to remain in office until he attains the compulsory retiring age comparable to justices of the Court of Appeal.
According to the court, it did not have the mandate to try the matter and thus adjourned to await the outcome of the highest court of the land.
The court said under the constitution the Supreme Court was the only court with jurisdiction to deal with all matters related to the enforcement and interpretation of the constitution.
Mr Asiedu-Nketia is seeking several declarations, including that by virtue of Article 199 of the Constitution and section 10(a) of the Audit Service Act 2000 (Act 584), Mr Agyeman is disqualified to be the Auditor General of Ghana because he is more than 60 years old.
According to him, the appointment by the President of Mr Agyeman was unconstitutional, illegal and void and that his continued stay in office was inconsistent with the constitution.
The NDC General Secretary was, therefore, seeking an order to perpetually restrain Mr Agyeman from holding himself out as the Auditor General.
While the matter is pending, the Attorney General (A - G) , who was also joined as the second defendant, filed a defence to raise issues that called for the interpretation of the constitution by the Supreme Court, which was charged with that responsibility.
The A-G argued that Mr Agyeman held his office by virtue of Article 70 of the Constitution, which empowered the President to make certain appointments in consultation with the Council of State.
The appointments, the A-G noted, included those of the Commissioner for the Commission of Human Rights and Administrative Justice and his deputies, the Auditor General, the District Assembly Common Fund Administrator, the chairman and other members of the Public Services Commission.
The rest are the Lands Commission, governing bodies of public corporations, the National Council for Higher Education, however, described and the holders of such other offices as may be prescribed by the constitution or by any law not inconsistent with the constitution.
The defence argued that the article removed the Auditor General from the category of public officials covered by Article 199 of the constitution which provided that a public officer shall, except as otherwise provided in the constitution, retire on attaining the age of 60 years.
The MP for Asikuma Odoben Brakwa is invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to seek interpretation to the combined effects of Articles 17, 70, 71, 144, 145, 146 and 182 of the 1992 Constitution and on the true and proper interpretation of the constitution as regards the retiring age of the Auditor General.
He is seeking declarations among which are that on the true and proper interpretation of the constitution, the Auditor General is not a public officer within the contemplation of and for the purposes of Articles 191, 195 and 199 of the constitution, that section 10 (4) of Act 584 is inconsistent with and in contravention of the constitution and is thus null and void.
In addition, he said that except for the grounds stated in Article 146 of the constitution, the Auditor General may remain in office until he/she attains the compulsory retiring age which is comparable to that of justices of the Court of Appeal.
THE controversy over the retiring age and the continued stay in office of the Auditor General, Mr Dua Agyeman, is now a matter before the Supreme Court.
Consequently, the Accra Fast Track High Court, which was hearing a writ filed by Mr Johnson Asiedu-Nketia, General Secretary of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) challenging the continued stay in office of Mr Agyeman has adjourned the matter sine die.
The court adjourned the matter after it granted an application by the Attorney-General praying for the adjournment because the matter had been referred to the Supreme Court for interpretation by a Member of Parliament (MP), Mr P. C. Ofori Appiah.
For the MP, the Auditor General is not a public officer appointed under Article 70 of the constitution so as to remain in office until he attains the compulsory retiring age comparable to justices of the Court of Appeal.
According to the court, it did not have the mandate to try the matter and thus adjourned to await the outcome of the highest court of the land.
The court said under the constitution the Supreme Court was the only court with jurisdiction to deal with all matters related to the enforcement and interpretation of the constitution.
Mr Asiedu-Nketia is seeking several declarations, including that by virtue of Article 199 of the Constitution and section 10(a) of the Audit Service Act 2000 (Act 584), Mr Agyeman is disqualified to be the Auditor General of Ghana because he is more than 60 years old.
According to him, the appointment by the President of Mr Agyeman was unconstitutional, illegal and void and that his continued stay in office was inconsistent with the constitution.
The NDC General Secretary was, therefore, seeking an order to perpetually restrain Mr Agyeman from holding himself out as the Auditor General.
While the matter is pending, the Attorney General (A - G) , who was also joined as the second defendant, filed a defence to raise issues that called for the interpretation of the constitution by the Supreme Court, which was charged with that responsibility.
The A-G argued that Mr Agyeman held his office by virtue of Article 70 of the Constitution, which empowered the President to make certain appointments in consultation with the Council of State.
The appointments, the A-G noted, included those of the Commissioner for the Commission of Human Rights and Administrative Justice and his deputies, the Auditor General, the District Assembly Common Fund Administrator, the chairman and other members of the Public Services Commission.
The rest are the Lands Commission, governing bodies of public corporations, the National Council for Higher Education, however, described and the holders of such other offices as may be prescribed by the constitution or by any law not inconsistent with the constitution.
The defence argued that the article removed the Auditor General from the category of public officials covered by Article 199 of the constitution which provided that a public officer shall, except as otherwise provided in the constitution, retire on attaining the age of 60 years.
The MP for Asikuma Odoben Brakwa is invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to seek interpretation to the combined effects of Articles 17, 70, 71, 144, 145, 146 and 182 of the 1992 Constitution and on the true and proper interpretation of the constitution as regards the retiring age of the Auditor General.
He is seeking declarations among which are that on the true and proper interpretation of the constitution, the Auditor General is not a public officer within the contemplation of and for the purposes of Articles 191, 195 and 199 of the constitution, that section 10 (4) of Act 584 is inconsistent with and in contravention of the constitution and is thus null and void.
In addition, he said that except for the grounds stated in Article 146 of the constitution, the Auditor General may remain in office until he/she attains the compulsory retiring age which is comparable to that of justices of the Court of Appeal.
ECOBANK UNCOVERTS ¢4 BILLION FRAUD
Story: Stephen Sah
OFFICIALS of ECOBANK Ghana Limited have uncovered a fraud in which three persons are alleged to have withdrawn more than ¢4 billion belonging to two customers of the bank in Accra.
The main architect of the deal, Solomon Agbeko alias Joseph Blankson, whose arrest will open the lid on how the moneys were stolen, is on the run but two of his accomplices were yesterday remanded in prison custody by an Accra circuit court on a charge of stealing.
They are Bernard Kofi Sallah, a driver, and Kwasi Adai, a farmer. Their pleas were not taken and they would appear again on December 19, 2007.
Prosecuting, Police Chief Inspector Peter Benneh told the court that while investigations into the matter were under way, it has been established that the group managed to steal ¢3,123,102,524.26 and ¢1,023,863,381.88 from the accounts of Ibis Ghana Ltd and Far East Mercantile Ltd, respectively.
The facts as narrated to the court did not bring out how the thefts were made but the prosecutor said Sallah, who was a customer to the bank, early this year accompanied Agbeko to the Ring Road Central branch of ECOBANK to serve as a guarantor to enable Agbeko to open an account.
Chief Inspector Benneh said when the two got to the bank, the bank officials detected that Sallah, who was a savings account holder, did not qualify to serve as a guarantor for someone who wanted to open an account with the bank.
However, he said, Sallah drew the attention of Simon Akakpo, a staff of the bank whom he claimed was his friend, to their plight and allegedly said Akakpo gave the go-ahead to enable him (Sallah) to serve as a guarantor for Agbeko.
The prosecutor said based on the instruction of Akakpo, the account was opened for Agbeko, who after that went to the Silver Star Tower branch of ECOBANK to open another account which was guaranteed by Sallah.
He said between February 14, 2007 and March 21, 2007, Agbeko used the two accounts to withdraw the money from the accounts of the two companiesSince Agbeko was at large, he said, the bank officials relied on the information they had on Sallah to arrest the accused persons. During interrogation, it was discovered that Agbeko paid one of the cheques with a face value of ¢168 million that belonged to Ibis Ghana Ltd into the accounts of Adai to be cashed for him.
Chief Inspector Benneh said Adai, after cashing the money for Agbeko, was said to have received ¢25 million for his role in bringing the deal to fruition.
OFFICIALS of ECOBANK Ghana Limited have uncovered a fraud in which three persons are alleged to have withdrawn more than ¢4 billion belonging to two customers of the bank in Accra.
The main architect of the deal, Solomon Agbeko alias Joseph Blankson, whose arrest will open the lid on how the moneys were stolen, is on the run but two of his accomplices were yesterday remanded in prison custody by an Accra circuit court on a charge of stealing.
They are Bernard Kofi Sallah, a driver, and Kwasi Adai, a farmer. Their pleas were not taken and they would appear again on December 19, 2007.
Prosecuting, Police Chief Inspector Peter Benneh told the court that while investigations into the matter were under way, it has been established that the group managed to steal ¢3,123,102,524.26 and ¢1,023,863,381.88 from the accounts of Ibis Ghana Ltd and Far East Mercantile Ltd, respectively.
The facts as narrated to the court did not bring out how the thefts were made but the prosecutor said Sallah, who was a customer to the bank, early this year accompanied Agbeko to the Ring Road Central branch of ECOBANK to serve as a guarantor to enable Agbeko to open an account.
Chief Inspector Benneh said when the two got to the bank, the bank officials detected that Sallah, who was a savings account holder, did not qualify to serve as a guarantor for someone who wanted to open an account with the bank.
However, he said, Sallah drew the attention of Simon Akakpo, a staff of the bank whom he claimed was his friend, to their plight and allegedly said Akakpo gave the go-ahead to enable him (Sallah) to serve as a guarantor for Agbeko.
The prosecutor said based on the instruction of Akakpo, the account was opened for Agbeko, who after that went to the Silver Star Tower branch of ECOBANK to open another account which was guaranteed by Sallah.
He said between February 14, 2007 and March 21, 2007, Agbeko used the two accounts to withdraw the money from the accounts of the two companiesSince Agbeko was at large, he said, the bank officials relied on the information they had on Sallah to arrest the accused persons. During interrogation, it was discovered that Agbeko paid one of the cheques with a face value of ¢168 million that belonged to Ibis Ghana Ltd into the accounts of Adai to be cashed for him.
Chief Inspector Benneh said Adai, after cashing the money for Agbeko, was said to have received ¢25 million for his role in bringing the deal to fruition.
Monday, December 10, 2007
TWO BRITISH GIRLS TO BE SENTENCED NEXT YEAR
Story: Stephen Sah
ANXIOUS local and foreign journalists and many people who thronged the Juvenile Court premises in Accra to hear the sentence of the two British juveniles found in possession of six kilogrammes of cocaine were disappointed because the sentence was deferred.
According to a court source, the sentence of the two girls had been deferred until January 9, 2008 to await a social services report considered crucial to assist the court in delivering the sentence.
On November 21, 2007, the court found the two guilty of conspiracy and possessing narcotic drugs without lawful authority.
It, however, deferred their sentence to yesterday to await the report which is expected to give a profile and background on the juveniles from the British authorities.
Very early in the morning, journalists, especially photographers, positioned themselves at vantage areas in anticipation of catching a glimpse of the girls who have been kept away from the prying lenses of the cameras.
A vehicle believed to be conveying the girls later arrived and reversed to the frontage of a back door followed by photographers.
At the last sitting of the court, lawyers of the girls declared their intention to appeal against the convictions.
The trial of the girls was heard in camera because the law did not permit cases involving juveniles to be heard in open court but that did not take away its intense public attention.
In all, seven prosecution witnesses and one defence witness were said to have testified in the trial, which lasted about four months.
The girls pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and possession of narcotic drugs without lawful authority and maintained that they were lured into Ghana by two men who left them to their fate.
They were arrested at the Kotoka International Airport (KIA) by officials of the Narcotics Control Board (NACOB) on July 2, 2007.
Each had in her possession three kilogrammes of cocaine hidden in her laptop bag.
ANXIOUS local and foreign journalists and many people who thronged the Juvenile Court premises in Accra to hear the sentence of the two British juveniles found in possession of six kilogrammes of cocaine were disappointed because the sentence was deferred.
According to a court source, the sentence of the two girls had been deferred until January 9, 2008 to await a social services report considered crucial to assist the court in delivering the sentence.
On November 21, 2007, the court found the two guilty of conspiracy and possessing narcotic drugs without lawful authority.
It, however, deferred their sentence to yesterday to await the report which is expected to give a profile and background on the juveniles from the British authorities.
Very early in the morning, journalists, especially photographers, positioned themselves at vantage areas in anticipation of catching a glimpse of the girls who have been kept away from the prying lenses of the cameras.
A vehicle believed to be conveying the girls later arrived and reversed to the frontage of a back door followed by photographers.
At the last sitting of the court, lawyers of the girls declared their intention to appeal against the convictions.
The trial of the girls was heard in camera because the law did not permit cases involving juveniles to be heard in open court but that did not take away its intense public attention.
In all, seven prosecution witnesses and one defence witness were said to have testified in the trial, which lasted about four months.
The girls pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and possession of narcotic drugs without lawful authority and maintained that they were lured into Ghana by two men who left them to their fate.
They were arrested at the Kotoka International Airport (KIA) by officials of the Narcotics Control Board (NACOB) on July 2, 2007.
Each had in her possession three kilogrammes of cocaine hidden in her laptop bag.
Story: Stephen Sah
(A - G’s retiring age now before Supreme Court)
THE controversy over the retiring age and the continued stay in office of the Auditor General, Mr Dua Agyeman, is now a matter before the Supreme Court.
Consequently, the Accra Fast Track High Court, which was hearing a writ filed by Mr Johnson Asiedu-Nketia, General Secretary of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) challenging the continued stay in office of Mr Agyeman has adjourned the matter sine die.
The court adjourned the matter after it granted an application by the Attorney-General praying for the adjournment because the matter had been referred to the Supreme Court for interpretation by a Member of Parliament (MP), Mr P. C. Ofori Appiah.
For the MP, the Auditor General is not a public officer appointed under Article 70 of the constitution so as to remain in office until he attains the compulsory retiring age comparable to justices of the Court of Appeal.
According to the court, it did not have the mandate to try the matter and thus adjourned to await the outcome of the highest court of the land.
The court said under the constitution the Supreme Court was the only court with jurisdiction to deal with all matters related to the enforcement and interpretation of the constitution.
Mr Asiedu-Nketia is seeking several declarations, including that by virtue of Article 199 of the Constitution and section 10(a) of the Audit Service Act 2000 (Act 584), Mr Agyeman is disqualified to be the Auditor General of Ghana because he is more than 60 years old.
According to him, the appointment by the President of Mr Agyeman was unconstitutional, illegal and void and that his continued stay in office was inconsistent with the constitution.
The NDC General Secretary was, therefore, seeking an order to perpetually restrain Mr Agyeman from holding himself out as the Auditor General.
While the matter is pending, the Attorney General (A - G) , who was also joined as the second defendant, filed a defence to raise issues that called for the interpretation of the constitution by the Supreme Court, which was charged with that responsibility.
The A-G argued that Mr Agyeman held his office by virtue of Article 70 of the Constitution, which empowered the President to make certain appointments in consultation with the Council of State.
The appointments, the A-G noted, included those of the Commissioner for the Commission of Human Rights and Administrative Justice and his deputies, the Auditor General, the District Assembly Common Fund Administrator, the chairman and other members of the Public Services Commission.
The rest are the Lands Commission, governing bodies of public corporations, the National Council for Higher Education, however, described and the holders of such other offices as may be prescribed by the constitution or by any law not inconsistent with the constitution.
The defence argued that the article removed the Auditor General from the category of public officials covered by Article 199 of the constitution which provided that a public officer shall, except as otherwise provided in the constitution, retire on attaining the age of 60 years.
The MP for Asikuma Odoben Brakwa is invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to seek interpretation to the combined effects of Articles 17, 70, 71, 144, 145, 146 and 182 of the 1992 Constitution and on the true and proper interpretation of the constitution as regards the retiring age of the Auditor General.
He is seeking declarations among which are that on the true and proper interpretation of the constitution, the Auditor General is not a public officer within the contemplation of and for the purposes of Articles 191, 195 and 199 of the constitution, that section 10 (4) of Act 584 is inconsistent with and in contravention of the constitution and is thus null and void.
In addition, he said that except for the grounds stated in Article 146 of the constitution, the Auditor General may remain in office until he/she attains the compulsory retiring age which is comparable to that of justices of the Court of Appeal.
(A - G’s retiring age now before Supreme Court)
THE controversy over the retiring age and the continued stay in office of the Auditor General, Mr Dua Agyeman, is now a matter before the Supreme Court.
Consequently, the Accra Fast Track High Court, which was hearing a writ filed by Mr Johnson Asiedu-Nketia, General Secretary of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) challenging the continued stay in office of Mr Agyeman has adjourned the matter sine die.
The court adjourned the matter after it granted an application by the Attorney-General praying for the adjournment because the matter had been referred to the Supreme Court for interpretation by a Member of Parliament (MP), Mr P. C. Ofori Appiah.
For the MP, the Auditor General is not a public officer appointed under Article 70 of the constitution so as to remain in office until he attains the compulsory retiring age comparable to justices of the Court of Appeal.
According to the court, it did not have the mandate to try the matter and thus adjourned to await the outcome of the highest court of the land.
The court said under the constitution the Supreme Court was the only court with jurisdiction to deal with all matters related to the enforcement and interpretation of the constitution.
Mr Asiedu-Nketia is seeking several declarations, including that by virtue of Article 199 of the Constitution and section 10(a) of the Audit Service Act 2000 (Act 584), Mr Agyeman is disqualified to be the Auditor General of Ghana because he is more than 60 years old.
According to him, the appointment by the President of Mr Agyeman was unconstitutional, illegal and void and that his continued stay in office was inconsistent with the constitution.
The NDC General Secretary was, therefore, seeking an order to perpetually restrain Mr Agyeman from holding himself out as the Auditor General.
While the matter is pending, the Attorney General (A - G) , who was also joined as the second defendant, filed a defence to raise issues that called for the interpretation of the constitution by the Supreme Court, which was charged with that responsibility.
The A-G argued that Mr Agyeman held his office by virtue of Article 70 of the Constitution, which empowered the President to make certain appointments in consultation with the Council of State.
The appointments, the A-G noted, included those of the Commissioner for the Commission of Human Rights and Administrative Justice and his deputies, the Auditor General, the District Assembly Common Fund Administrator, the chairman and other members of the Public Services Commission.
The rest are the Lands Commission, governing bodies of public corporations, the National Council for Higher Education, however, described and the holders of such other offices as may be prescribed by the constitution or by any law not inconsistent with the constitution.
The defence argued that the article removed the Auditor General from the category of public officials covered by Article 199 of the constitution which provided that a public officer shall, except as otherwise provided in the constitution, retire on attaining the age of 60 years.
The MP for Asikuma Odoben Brakwa is invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to seek interpretation to the combined effects of Articles 17, 70, 71, 144, 145, 146 and 182 of the 1992 Constitution and on the true and proper interpretation of the constitution as regards the retiring age of the Auditor General.
He is seeking declarations among which are that on the true and proper interpretation of the constitution, the Auditor General is not a public officer within the contemplation of and for the purposes of Articles 191, 195 and 199 of the constitution, that section 10 (4) of Act 584 is inconsistent with and in contravention of the constitution and is thus null and void.
In addition, he said that except for the grounds stated in Article 146 of the constitution, the Auditor General may remain in office until he/she attains the compulsory retiring age which is comparable to that of justices of the Court of Appeal.
COURT TO HEAR NANA KONADU CASE IN DECEMBER
05/12/07
Story: Stephen Sah
THE Accra Fast Track High Court yesterday fixed December 18, 2007 to give its ruling on the application for stay of proceedings in the case in which Nana Konadu Agyeman Rawlings and two others are standing trial for allegedly causing financial loss to the state.
The court fixed the date after it had listened to a brief response on points of law made by Mr Tony Lither, counsel for the accused persons.
Counsel had, on November 15, 2007, prayed the court to stay proceedings in the matter because of a civil suit pending on the same matter or in the interim dismiss the case and stated that the criminal proceedings brought against his clients amounted to an abuse of power by the Attorney-General.
Nana Konadu, Sherry Ayittey, the Managing Director of Caridem Development Company Limited (CDCL), and Caridem as an entity filed the application for permanent stay of proceedings because the subject matter for which they were standing trial was being contested in another court in a civil suit brought against the Divestiture Implementation Committee (DIC) and the Attorney-General by CDCL over the take-over of the GIHOC Nsawam Cannery.
Also standing trial alongside the applicants are Emmanuel Amuzu Agbodo, a former Executive Secretary of the Divestiture Implementation Committee (DIC), and Kwame Peprah, a former Minister of Finance and former Chairman of the DIC.
They are facing various charges of conspiracy, causing financial loss to public property, conspiracy to obtain public property by false statement, obtaining public property by false statement and altering forged document.
They have denied the offences and have been admitted to self-recognisance bail.
The accused persons were alleged to have caused losses running into billions of cedis to public property in 1995 following the divestiture of the GIHOC Cannery at Nsawam, a government cannery, which was acquired by CDCL, which was owned by the 31st December Women’s Movement (DWM).
Mr Lithur said the court had power to question the activities of the Executive, of which the Attorney-General was part, and if that was not done, it would place the Attorney-General above the Constitution of the land.
He said the residual power of the Supreme Court was superior to any legislation and for that reason if the court did not accept what the Attorney-General was doing, then it meant the Executive could not be checked.
The Attorney-General, Mr Joe Ghartey, had described the application as unmeritorious because it was totally unknown in criminal law and the Constitution.
He said the institution of criminal action against the five was based on the Auditor-General's report on the malfeasance they committed in the acquisition of the GIHOC/Nsawam Cannery.
He said the effect of the application was to interfere with the powers of the Attorney-General in Article 88 of the Constitution.
Nana Konadu was accompanied to court by his husband, ex-President Rawlings.
Attendance by sympathisers of the former first lady was unprecedented, as the large crowd treated themselves to brass band music on the court premises.
They carried large National Democratic Congress (NDC) flags and mobbed the former President and it took his security a hectic time to control the enthusiastic crowd.
Story: Stephen Sah
THE Accra Fast Track High Court yesterday fixed December 18, 2007 to give its ruling on the application for stay of proceedings in the case in which Nana Konadu Agyeman Rawlings and two others are standing trial for allegedly causing financial loss to the state.
The court fixed the date after it had listened to a brief response on points of law made by Mr Tony Lither, counsel for the accused persons.
Counsel had, on November 15, 2007, prayed the court to stay proceedings in the matter because of a civil suit pending on the same matter or in the interim dismiss the case and stated that the criminal proceedings brought against his clients amounted to an abuse of power by the Attorney-General.
Nana Konadu, Sherry Ayittey, the Managing Director of Caridem Development Company Limited (CDCL), and Caridem as an entity filed the application for permanent stay of proceedings because the subject matter for which they were standing trial was being contested in another court in a civil suit brought against the Divestiture Implementation Committee (DIC) and the Attorney-General by CDCL over the take-over of the GIHOC Nsawam Cannery.
Also standing trial alongside the applicants are Emmanuel Amuzu Agbodo, a former Executive Secretary of the Divestiture Implementation Committee (DIC), and Kwame Peprah, a former Minister of Finance and former Chairman of the DIC.
They are facing various charges of conspiracy, causing financial loss to public property, conspiracy to obtain public property by false statement, obtaining public property by false statement and altering forged document.
They have denied the offences and have been admitted to self-recognisance bail.
The accused persons were alleged to have caused losses running into billions of cedis to public property in 1995 following the divestiture of the GIHOC Cannery at Nsawam, a government cannery, which was acquired by CDCL, which was owned by the 31st December Women’s Movement (DWM).
Mr Lithur said the court had power to question the activities of the Executive, of which the Attorney-General was part, and if that was not done, it would place the Attorney-General above the Constitution of the land.
He said the residual power of the Supreme Court was superior to any legislation and for that reason if the court did not accept what the Attorney-General was doing, then it meant the Executive could not be checked.
The Attorney-General, Mr Joe Ghartey, had described the application as unmeritorious because it was totally unknown in criminal law and the Constitution.
He said the institution of criminal action against the five was based on the Auditor-General's report on the malfeasance they committed in the acquisition of the GIHOC/Nsawam Cannery.
He said the effect of the application was to interfere with the powers of the Attorney-General in Article 88 of the Constitution.
Nana Konadu was accompanied to court by his husband, ex-President Rawlings.
Attendance by sympathisers of the former first lady was unprecedented, as the large crowd treated themselves to brass band music on the court premises.
They carried large National Democratic Congress (NDC) flags and mobbed the former President and it took his security a hectic time to control the enthusiastic crowd.
COURT TO HEAR NANA KONADU CASE IN DECEMBER
05/12/07
Story: Stephen Sah
THE Accra Fast Track High Court yesterday fixed December 18, 2007 to give its ruling on the application for stay of proceedings in the case in which Nana Konadu Agyeman Rawlings and two others are standing trial for allegedly causing financial loss to the state.
The court fixed the date after it had listened to a brief response on points of law made by Mr Tony Lither, counsel for the accused persons.
Counsel had, on November 15, 2007, prayed the court to stay proceedings in the matter because of a civil suit pending on the same matter or in the interim dismiss the case and stated that the criminal proceedings brought against his clients amounted to an abuse of power by the Attorney-General.
Nana Konadu, Sherry Ayittey, the Managing Director of Caridem Development Company Limited (CDCL), and Caridem as an entity filed the application for permanent stay of proceedings because the subject matter for which they were standing trial was being contested in another court in a civil suit brought against the Divestiture Implementation Committee (DIC) and the Attorney-General by CDCL over the take-over of the GIHOC Nsawam Cannery.
Also standing trial alongside the applicants are Emmanuel Amuzu Agbodo, a former Executive Secretary of the Divestiture Implementation Committee (DIC), and Kwame Peprah, a former Minister of Finance and former Chairman of the DIC.
They are facing various charges of conspiracy, causing financial loss to public property, conspiracy to obtain public property by false statement, obtaining public property by false statement and altering forged document.
They have denied the offences and have been admitted to self-recognisance bail.
The accused persons were alleged to have caused losses running into billions of cedis to public property in 1995 following the divestiture of the GIHOC Cannery at Nsawam, a government cannery, which was acquired by CDCL, which was owned by the 31st December Women’s Movement (DWM).
Mr Lithur said the court had power to question the activities of the Executive, of which the Attorney-General was part, and if that was not done, it would place the Attorney-General above the Constitution of the land.
He said the residual power of the Supreme Court was superior to any legislation and for that reason if the court did not accept what the Attorney-General was doing, then it meant the Executive could not be checked.
The Attorney-General, Mr Joe Ghartey, had described the application as unmeritorious because it was totally unknown in criminal law and the Constitution.
He said the institution of criminal action against the five was based on the Auditor-General's report on the malfeasance they committed in the acquisition of the GIHOC/Nsawam Cannery.
He said the effect of the application was to interfere with the powers of the Attorney-General in Article 88 of the Constitution.
Nana Konadu was accompanied to court by his husband, ex-President Rawlings.
Attendance by sympathisers of the former first lady was unprecedented, as the large crowd treated themselves to brass band music on the court premises.
They carried large National Democratic Congress (NDC) flags and mobbed the former President and it took his security a hectic time to control the enthusiastic crowd.
Story: Stephen Sah
THE Accra Fast Track High Court yesterday fixed December 18, 2007 to give its ruling on the application for stay of proceedings in the case in which Nana Konadu Agyeman Rawlings and two others are standing trial for allegedly causing financial loss to the state.
The court fixed the date after it had listened to a brief response on points of law made by Mr Tony Lither, counsel for the accused persons.
Counsel had, on November 15, 2007, prayed the court to stay proceedings in the matter because of a civil suit pending on the same matter or in the interim dismiss the case and stated that the criminal proceedings brought against his clients amounted to an abuse of power by the Attorney-General.
Nana Konadu, Sherry Ayittey, the Managing Director of Caridem Development Company Limited (CDCL), and Caridem as an entity filed the application for permanent stay of proceedings because the subject matter for which they were standing trial was being contested in another court in a civil suit brought against the Divestiture Implementation Committee (DIC) and the Attorney-General by CDCL over the take-over of the GIHOC Nsawam Cannery.
Also standing trial alongside the applicants are Emmanuel Amuzu Agbodo, a former Executive Secretary of the Divestiture Implementation Committee (DIC), and Kwame Peprah, a former Minister of Finance and former Chairman of the DIC.
They are facing various charges of conspiracy, causing financial loss to public property, conspiracy to obtain public property by false statement, obtaining public property by false statement and altering forged document.
They have denied the offences and have been admitted to self-recognisance bail.
The accused persons were alleged to have caused losses running into billions of cedis to public property in 1995 following the divestiture of the GIHOC Cannery at Nsawam, a government cannery, which was acquired by CDCL, which was owned by the 31st December Women’s Movement (DWM).
Mr Lithur said the court had power to question the activities of the Executive, of which the Attorney-General was part, and if that was not done, it would place the Attorney-General above the Constitution of the land.
He said the residual power of the Supreme Court was superior to any legislation and for that reason if the court did not accept what the Attorney-General was doing, then it meant the Executive could not be checked.
The Attorney-General, Mr Joe Ghartey, had described the application as unmeritorious because it was totally unknown in criminal law and the Constitution.
He said the institution of criminal action against the five was based on the Auditor-General's report on the malfeasance they committed in the acquisition of the GIHOC/Nsawam Cannery.
He said the effect of the application was to interfere with the powers of the Attorney-General in Article 88 of the Constitution.
Nana Konadu was accompanied to court by his husband, ex-President Rawlings.
Attendance by sympathisers of the former first lady was unprecedented, as the large crowd treated themselves to brass band music on the court premises.
They carried large National Democratic Congress (NDC) flags and mobbed the former President and it took his security a hectic time to control the enthusiastic crowd.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)