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.