THE Chairman of the Governing Council of the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA), Dr Edward Henaku Boohene, told an Accra Fast Track High Court on Monday that the council appointed the GIMPA Rector, Dr Stephen Adei, for a second term until his retirement in December this year.
He said the council, at its meeting on July 14, 2005, accepted the recommendations and gave approval for the appointment after a committee appointed to search for a rector had submitted its report to it.
He was testifying under cross-examination by Mr Daniel Amarteifio, counsel for Dr Adei, in the case in which Mr Egbert Isaac Faibille Jnr is seeking an order from the court to restrain the GIMPA Rector from holding himself out as a professor of the institute.
Mr Faibille also wants the court to order that Dr Adei is not a professor, either at GIMPA or any other institution, and he should, therefore, be restrained from holding himself out as such.
He further wants the court to order GIMPA to advertise the position of rector, since it was vacant because, according to him, since the tenure of office of Dr Adei expired on October 1, 2004, he had not been re-appointed as rector.
Dr Boohene said Dr Adei was appointed under the original terms of his first contract until the new terms of contract were reviewed by the Finance and Accounts Board.
Asked why he did not write to Dr Adei to confirm the council’s decision, Dr Boohene stated that he refused to write the letter because to him the appointment was invalid because he had not received the new terms of the contract.
The witness agreed with counsel that before Dr Adei was re-appointed, he had occupied and performed the functions of Rector without any protest from him (Dr Boohene) nor the council.
When counsel suggested to the witness that he refused to write the confirmation letter to Dr Adei because of a bad relationship between them, Dr Boohene replied that although the relationship was not the best, that was not the reason but that he had insisted that the right thing be done according to the laws of GIMPA.
He said it was true that some council members had expressed concern about the bad blood between them and because of that a committee was appointed to see President Kufuor about it.
“The Rector accused me of wanting his job so when we went to the President, this matter was discussed,” Dr Boohene said.
When he was asked whether he would have dismissed Dr Adei if he had the power to do so, he replied, “This is a difficult question, but any reasonable person who is the head of an institution has the moral right to do what is correct and that is what I would do,” adding that he had not had the time to assess Dr Adei’s performance as Rector of GIMPA.
Dr Boohene described as partly true the fact that he had refused to sign some minutes of GIMPA Council meetings because to his mind they were not correct.
Regarding Dr Adei’s professorial title, Dr Boohene said some members of the GIMPA Academic Board had come to him on the issue, and when counsel put it to him that those members could not be council members, the witness replied that some could be.
Dr Boohene said the council did not require Dr Adei to bring his professorial title for revaluation and added that he was unaware that Dr Adei had said his title was conferred on him by GIMPA.
Asked what he thought about the suit against them, Dr Boohene said he was puzzled by it and that he did not know Mr Faibille until the suit, although he had been reading the Ghanaian Observer, which he found interesting.
When counsel further asked him whether what the newspaper had been writing about Dr Adei was accurate, Dr Boohene replied in the negative, but when pressed further that he had been feeding the newspaper with that information, he said, “If I were not in court I would have said that this is absolutely nonsense.”
According to him, it was wrong for the Ghanaian Observer to say that Dr Adei had not been appointed, saying that any such information was misleading and he had not seen one.
“I am tired of the place,” he said about GIMPA, saying that even though GIMPA was not a big place, there were always problems.
Dr Boohene said as chairman of the council, his power overrode that of the council, but when asked to indicate the source of that information, he could not provide it.
Dr Adei will open his defence at the next sitting.
Thursday, February 07, 2008
GIMPA COUNCIL CHAIRMAN TESTIFIES IN COURT
THE Chairman of the Governing Council of the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA), Dr Edward Henaku Boohene, has said that he communicated the council’s decision to the GIMPA Rector, Dr Stephen Adei, that he should not use the title professor.
He also said that he did not write any letter to Dr Adei to re-appoint him as a rector after the expiration of his first term of office because by the terms of his previous appointment Dr Adei was to be offered additional two years’ extension.
Dr Boohene was testifying yesterday to close the case for Mr Egbert Isaac Faibille Jnr in a case in which he is seeking an order from the Fast Track High Court to restrain the GIMPA Rector from holding himself out as a professor of the institute.
Mr Faibille also wants the court to order that Dr Adei is not a professor, either at GIMPA or any other institution, and should, therefore, be restrained from holding himself out as such.
He further wants the court to order GIMPA to advertise the position of rector, since it was vacant because, according to him, since the tenure of office of Dr Adei expired on October 1, 2004, he had not been re-appointed as rector.
Dr Boohene said at an emergency meeting held by the Council on September 21, 2007, the council’s earlier decision that Dr Adei should not use the title professor came up because it was not recognised by GIMPA.
He said that after he communicated the decision to Dr Adei, the GIMPA Rector wrote back admitting the decision.
Regarding the re-appointment of Dr Adei, the witness said although he was directed at a meeting to make a re-appointment, that was to be done according to the law and Dr Adei was summoned to a meeting, which he complied.
The witness said he was enjoined by law to appoint a person as rector, according to the terms that the council would provide, while a decision was taken that someone should be appointed to take charge of academic and managerial matters as required by law.
Dr Boohene said during cross-examination that he was not personally the appointing authority of the Rector of GIMPA.
He also said that he did not write any letter to Dr Adei to re-appoint him as a rector after the expiration of his first term of office because by the terms of his previous appointment Dr Adei was to be offered additional two years’ extension.
Dr Boohene was testifying yesterday to close the case for Mr Egbert Isaac Faibille Jnr in a case in which he is seeking an order from the Fast Track High Court to restrain the GIMPA Rector from holding himself out as a professor of the institute.
Mr Faibille also wants the court to order that Dr Adei is not a professor, either at GIMPA or any other institution, and should, therefore, be restrained from holding himself out as such.
He further wants the court to order GIMPA to advertise the position of rector, since it was vacant because, according to him, since the tenure of office of Dr Adei expired on October 1, 2004, he had not been re-appointed as rector.
Dr Boohene said at an emergency meeting held by the Council on September 21, 2007, the council’s earlier decision that Dr Adei should not use the title professor came up because it was not recognised by GIMPA.
He said that after he communicated the decision to Dr Adei, the GIMPA Rector wrote back admitting the decision.
Regarding the re-appointment of Dr Adei, the witness said although he was directed at a meeting to make a re-appointment, that was to be done according to the law and Dr Adei was summoned to a meeting, which he complied.
The witness said he was enjoined by law to appoint a person as rector, according to the terms that the council would provide, while a decision was taken that someone should be appointed to take charge of academic and managerial matters as required by law.
Dr Boohene said during cross-examination that he was not personally the appointing authority of the Rector of GIMPA.
GIMPA COUNCIL MEMBER TESTIFIES IN COURT
THE Executive Chairman of the State Enterprises Commission (SEC), Mr Francis Kofi Ocran, has told an Accra Fast Track High Court that the Governing Council of the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA) asked the Rector, Dr Stephen Adei, not to use the title professor because it was not recognised by the institute.
“At GIMPA, you do not bring any title like professor and start using it. Any such title will have to be presented to the council to examine its authenticity in order to accept it or not,” he said, and pointed out that in the case of Dr Adei, the GIMPA Council examined it and took a decision that he should not use it.
Mr Ocran, who is also a member of the GIMPA Governing Council, said this when he testified in the case in which Mr Egbert Isaac Faibille Jnr is seeking an order from the Fast Track High Court to restrain the GIMPA Rector from holding himself out as a professor of the institute.
Mr Faibille wants the court to order that Dr Adei is not a professor, either at GIMPA or any other institution, and should, therefore, be restrained from holding himself out as such.
He further wants the court to order GIMPA to advertise the position of rector, since it was vacant because, according to him, since the tenure of office of Dr Adei expired on October 1, 2004, he had not been re-appointed as rector.
The witness said he was aware that Dr Adei had a professorial title and recalled that at one of the council’s meetings, the issue came up after Dr Adei had informed the meeting of his title, which was conferred on him by the African Leadership and Management Academy based in Zimbabwe.
Mr Ocran said Dr Adei was initially appointed as the Director-General of GIMPA for four years, adding that after the expiration of his tenure, his appointment was extended until Dr Adei reached his retiring age.
He said the issue of extending Dr Adei’s tenure was discussed by the council, during which the chairman and the secretary were given the responsibility to see to it that a letter was written, but that was not done.
During cross-examination by counsel for Dr Adei, the witness admitted that Dr Adei was not appointed to an academic position at GIMPA but as the chief executive officer.
According to him, since GIMPA was an academic institution, all positions were related to academic qualifications which were reviewed during appointments, saying that by convention and the minutes of the Governing Council, the staff of the institute had to apply for the re-evaluation of those titles, taking into account their qualifications.
However, in an answer to a question that a council member, Prof Kwabena Frimpong-Boateng, and others had their “professor” titles conferred on them and yet they were not vetted before they became GIMPA Council members, the witness replied that that situation was different from Dr Adei’s case.
Mr Ocran said it was the right of the shareholder to appoint those it considered qualified to be board members, saying that position was different from somebody in functional management and in the case of Dr Adei he indicated that apart from being the Rector, he also lectured at GIMPA.
He said in all the council meetings that he attended, Dr Adei was addressed as “professor”.
Meanwhile, the Editor of the Daily Graphic, Mr Ransford Tetteh, has appeared before the court to testify in the case. He referred to a publication in the July 5, 2002 edition of the paper in which it was reported that Dr Adei had been appointed professor.
Mr Tetteh said he did not know the source of the story and was of the view that documents like what was used to publish the story could emanate from authentic sources.
He said the Daily Graphic was a responsible paper and would not publish any falsehood or misleading information.
“At GIMPA, you do not bring any title like professor and start using it. Any such title will have to be presented to the council to examine its authenticity in order to accept it or not,” he said, and pointed out that in the case of Dr Adei, the GIMPA Council examined it and took a decision that he should not use it.
Mr Ocran, who is also a member of the GIMPA Governing Council, said this when he testified in the case in which Mr Egbert Isaac Faibille Jnr is seeking an order from the Fast Track High Court to restrain the GIMPA Rector from holding himself out as a professor of the institute.
Mr Faibille wants the court to order that Dr Adei is not a professor, either at GIMPA or any other institution, and should, therefore, be restrained from holding himself out as such.
He further wants the court to order GIMPA to advertise the position of rector, since it was vacant because, according to him, since the tenure of office of Dr Adei expired on October 1, 2004, he had not been re-appointed as rector.
The witness said he was aware that Dr Adei had a professorial title and recalled that at one of the council’s meetings, the issue came up after Dr Adei had informed the meeting of his title, which was conferred on him by the African Leadership and Management Academy based in Zimbabwe.
Mr Ocran said Dr Adei was initially appointed as the Director-General of GIMPA for four years, adding that after the expiration of his tenure, his appointment was extended until Dr Adei reached his retiring age.
He said the issue of extending Dr Adei’s tenure was discussed by the council, during which the chairman and the secretary were given the responsibility to see to it that a letter was written, but that was not done.
During cross-examination by counsel for Dr Adei, the witness admitted that Dr Adei was not appointed to an academic position at GIMPA but as the chief executive officer.
According to him, since GIMPA was an academic institution, all positions were related to academic qualifications which were reviewed during appointments, saying that by convention and the minutes of the Governing Council, the staff of the institute had to apply for the re-evaluation of those titles, taking into account their qualifications.
However, in an answer to a question that a council member, Prof Kwabena Frimpong-Boateng, and others had their “professor” titles conferred on them and yet they were not vetted before they became GIMPA Council members, the witness replied that that situation was different from Dr Adei’s case.
Mr Ocran said it was the right of the shareholder to appoint those it considered qualified to be board members, saying that position was different from somebody in functional management and in the case of Dr Adei he indicated that apart from being the Rector, he also lectured at GIMPA.
He said in all the council meetings that he attended, Dr Adei was addressed as “professor”.
Meanwhile, the Editor of the Daily Graphic, Mr Ransford Tetteh, has appeared before the court to testify in the case. He referred to a publication in the July 5, 2002 edition of the paper in which it was reported that Dr Adei had been appointed professor.
Mr Tetteh said he did not know the source of the story and was of the view that documents like what was used to publish the story could emanate from authentic sources.
He said the Daily Graphic was a responsible paper and would not publish any falsehood or misleading information.
SG-SSB BANK BOSS CAUTIONEND AND DISCHARGED
AN Accra High Court has cautioned and discharged the Managing Director of the SG-SSB Bank Ltd, Mr Alain Bellisard, for contempt of court after he had purged himself of the court order.
Counsel for Mr Bellisard, Mr Brookman Amissah, surrendered the title deeds on a house at Lever Avenue in Sekondi in the Western Region to Mr Kwame Fosu-Gyeabour, counsel for Gbewaa Civil Engineering Ltd, something which the court had directed to be done but had not been done, resulting in Bellisard’s conviction for contempt.
The court had, on March 26, 2006, ordered the bank to surrender title deeds on the house but it failed to do that, following which Gbewaa Ltd applied to the court for an order to commit the bank, particularly its managing director, for contempt of court, which the court upheld.
The managing director was admitted to a self-recognisance bail in the sum of GH¢20,000 and given 14 days within which to purge himself.
Meanwhile, Mr Amissah informed the court that his client was aggrieved by its proceedings and had, therefore, petitioned the Chief Justice to transfer the case from the court.
Counsel said that notwithstanding, he had also filed for proceedings in the matter to be stayed, since the court was not prepared to hear an application for stay of execution, which was a right to the applicant.
According to counsel, he had three appeal applications pending, arguing that in the light of that the court ought to hear his application for stay of execution.
Counsel for Gbewaa Ltd indicated to the court that the contemnor was abusing the process of the court and for that matter could not ask for any remedy from the court.
He said the position had been that until the contemnor purged himself, he could not be heard and whatever documents had been filed by his counsel should be disregarded and sentenced.
That line of argument brought Mr Amissah to his feet. He argued that it was not the true position of the law and that he only drew the court's attention to the processes that had been filed and was prepared to abide by the court's opinion.
According to him, the contemnor had to obey the court's order, sue for a declaration to that effect or make an application to set aside the order, saying that until those steps had been taken, one had to obey the order.
In view of the court's position not to countenance any further application in respect of the matter, Mr Amissah rendered an apology to the court and surrendered the document without any prejudice.
Gbewaa Ltd contracted a loan from the SG-SSB Bank in 2002 and used the documents as collateral until the loan was repaid.
After that the bank took the applicants to court on the grounds that the company had not finished with the payment but the court, after going into the matter, ruled that the documents should be surrendered because the company was not indebted to the bank.
In its contempt application, Gbewaa Ltd said although when the court gave its order that the respondent bank should surrender the documents its managing director was not in court, counsel was present.
It said subsequently the order was served on the bank but it refused to comply with it.
The bank’s counsel opposed the contempt application because, according to him, it was misconceived and incompetent because the present managing director, a French national, had assumed office in Ghana at a time when the court order had long been given.
Furthermore, the respondent argued that the convict had not been served with the court order, the subject of contempt, and that by the date of service of the said processes on him the bank had long since filed an appeal against the order, while an application for stay of execution pending appeal against the order had been filed as far back as June 14, 2006.
The bank denied having committed any contempt of court in the circumstances.
However, the court ruled that the relevant evidence available was that on April 19, 2006 the order was delivered to the managing director’s office, whereupon his secretary directed the bailiff to serve the order on the Recovery Unit of the bank.
It said the managing director’s secretary understood the order and, therefore, directed the bailiff to the immediate relevant unit of the bank and that in the normal scheme of things, the Secretary at the Recovery Unit, Madam Beatrice Quarshie, had received the document as an official document for and on behalf of her employers, the bank.
The court ruled that it was immaterial that the present managing director was not in office at the time of service of the court order on the bank and that the fact of the matter was that he took office with all the responsibilities and duties attached to the office.
“It will be preposterous to think otherwise. The managing director in office is attachable, once it has been proved that the court’s order has been disobeyed by the respondent bank,” said the court.
Counsel for Mr Bellisard, Mr Brookman Amissah, surrendered the title deeds on a house at Lever Avenue in Sekondi in the Western Region to Mr Kwame Fosu-Gyeabour, counsel for Gbewaa Civil Engineering Ltd, something which the court had directed to be done but had not been done, resulting in Bellisard’s conviction for contempt.
The court had, on March 26, 2006, ordered the bank to surrender title deeds on the house but it failed to do that, following which Gbewaa Ltd applied to the court for an order to commit the bank, particularly its managing director, for contempt of court, which the court upheld.
The managing director was admitted to a self-recognisance bail in the sum of GH¢20,000 and given 14 days within which to purge himself.
Meanwhile, Mr Amissah informed the court that his client was aggrieved by its proceedings and had, therefore, petitioned the Chief Justice to transfer the case from the court.
Counsel said that notwithstanding, he had also filed for proceedings in the matter to be stayed, since the court was not prepared to hear an application for stay of execution, which was a right to the applicant.
According to counsel, he had three appeal applications pending, arguing that in the light of that the court ought to hear his application for stay of execution.
Counsel for Gbewaa Ltd indicated to the court that the contemnor was abusing the process of the court and for that matter could not ask for any remedy from the court.
He said the position had been that until the contemnor purged himself, he could not be heard and whatever documents had been filed by his counsel should be disregarded and sentenced.
That line of argument brought Mr Amissah to his feet. He argued that it was not the true position of the law and that he only drew the court's attention to the processes that had been filed and was prepared to abide by the court's opinion.
According to him, the contemnor had to obey the court's order, sue for a declaration to that effect or make an application to set aside the order, saying that until those steps had been taken, one had to obey the order.
In view of the court's position not to countenance any further application in respect of the matter, Mr Amissah rendered an apology to the court and surrendered the document without any prejudice.
Gbewaa Ltd contracted a loan from the SG-SSB Bank in 2002 and used the documents as collateral until the loan was repaid.
After that the bank took the applicants to court on the grounds that the company had not finished with the payment but the court, after going into the matter, ruled that the documents should be surrendered because the company was not indebted to the bank.
In its contempt application, Gbewaa Ltd said although when the court gave its order that the respondent bank should surrender the documents its managing director was not in court, counsel was present.
It said subsequently the order was served on the bank but it refused to comply with it.
The bank’s counsel opposed the contempt application because, according to him, it was misconceived and incompetent because the present managing director, a French national, had assumed office in Ghana at a time when the court order had long been given.
Furthermore, the respondent argued that the convict had not been served with the court order, the subject of contempt, and that by the date of service of the said processes on him the bank had long since filed an appeal against the order, while an application for stay of execution pending appeal against the order had been filed as far back as June 14, 2006.
The bank denied having committed any contempt of court in the circumstances.
However, the court ruled that the relevant evidence available was that on April 19, 2006 the order was delivered to the managing director’s office, whereupon his secretary directed the bailiff to serve the order on the Recovery Unit of the bank.
It said the managing director’s secretary understood the order and, therefore, directed the bailiff to the immediate relevant unit of the bank and that in the normal scheme of things, the Secretary at the Recovery Unit, Madam Beatrice Quarshie, had received the document as an official document for and on behalf of her employers, the bank.
The court ruled that it was immaterial that the present managing director was not in office at the time of service of the court order on the bank and that the fact of the matter was that he took office with all the responsibilities and duties attached to the office.
“It will be preposterous to think otherwise. The managing director in office is attachable, once it has been proved that the court’s order has been disobeyed by the respondent bank,” said the court.
LAWYERS IN JAILED MP'S CASE AGREE TO WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
COUNSEL in the substantive appeal filed by Dan Abodakpi, a former Minister of Trade and Industry, against his 10-year conviction for causing financial loss of $400,000 to the state on have agreed to submit written submissions instead of oral submissions.
Consequently, the Court of Appeal gave counsel for the appellant one week within which to file the written submissions while the respondent is to reply two weeks after that to enable the registrar of the court to fix a date for judgement.
The parties came to the agreement after Mr Tony Lithur, counsel for the jailed Member of Parliament (MP) for Keta, rose to present his oral submissions when the court had requested them to present written submissions instead of making oral submissions.
Abodakpi, who is the sitting MP for Keta, was on February 5, 2007 sentenced to a 10-year hard labour by the Fast Track High Court after being convicted on all seven counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretences and wilfully causing financial loss of $400,000 to the state.
His attempt to get a bail pending the appeal failed when the trial court on April 19, 2007, declined to grant his application for bail on the grounds that it was unmeritorious because its refusal would not occasion any miscarriage of justice to him.
The court held that being a sitting MP did not make Abodakpi’s case any exceptional to justify the granting of bail pending an appeal.
The former Trade and Industries Minister was said to have, between May and December 2000, acted, together with the late Victor Selormey, who was a former Deputy Minister of Finance and Economic Planning; Dr Frederick Boadu, a consultant, and other persons with a common purpose, to wilfully cause financial loss of $400,000 to the state through the Trade and Investment Programme (TIP).
The amount was in respect of a feasibility study for the establishment of a Science and Technology Community Park/Valley Project which was meant to enhance the export of non-traditional products.
They were charged with causing the transfer of the cedi equivalent of $400,000 during their tenure of office in the National Democratic Congress (NDC) administration when they co-chaired the TIP.
The former ministers were accused of causing the transfer from the TIP interest account lodged with ECOBANK Ghana Limited into the personal account of the project consultant, Dr Boadu.
They were arraigned on October 14, 2002 on three counts of conspiracy, two counts of defrauding and two counts of wilfully causing financial loss to the state but both of them pleaded not guilty to the charges and were granted self-recognisance bail.
Selormey, however, died in the course of the trial.
Meanwhile, Abodakpi’s counsel in his amended grounds of appeal said the trial judge erred in disregarding the evidence of the defence without any reason and described the sentence as unreasonable, excessive, baseless and totally unsupported by the facts and the evidence adduced at the trial.
He stated that the judge failed to make any findings of the specific intent necessary to prove the charges levelled against the appellant.
He said the trial judge erred in refusing to give reasons for imposing the maximum custodial sentence on the appellant.
Counsel said the judge erred in placing undue reliance on the designation of feasibility study in correspondence about the payments to Dr Frederick Boadu when the evidence of the prosecution clearly showed that the designation was irrelevant to the making of the payments.
Consequently, the Court of Appeal gave counsel for the appellant one week within which to file the written submissions while the respondent is to reply two weeks after that to enable the registrar of the court to fix a date for judgement.
The parties came to the agreement after Mr Tony Lithur, counsel for the jailed Member of Parliament (MP) for Keta, rose to present his oral submissions when the court had requested them to present written submissions instead of making oral submissions.
Abodakpi, who is the sitting MP for Keta, was on February 5, 2007 sentenced to a 10-year hard labour by the Fast Track High Court after being convicted on all seven counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretences and wilfully causing financial loss of $400,000 to the state.
His attempt to get a bail pending the appeal failed when the trial court on April 19, 2007, declined to grant his application for bail on the grounds that it was unmeritorious because its refusal would not occasion any miscarriage of justice to him.
The court held that being a sitting MP did not make Abodakpi’s case any exceptional to justify the granting of bail pending an appeal.
The former Trade and Industries Minister was said to have, between May and December 2000, acted, together with the late Victor Selormey, who was a former Deputy Minister of Finance and Economic Planning; Dr Frederick Boadu, a consultant, and other persons with a common purpose, to wilfully cause financial loss of $400,000 to the state through the Trade and Investment Programme (TIP).
The amount was in respect of a feasibility study for the establishment of a Science and Technology Community Park/Valley Project which was meant to enhance the export of non-traditional products.
They were charged with causing the transfer of the cedi equivalent of $400,000 during their tenure of office in the National Democratic Congress (NDC) administration when they co-chaired the TIP.
The former ministers were accused of causing the transfer from the TIP interest account lodged with ECOBANK Ghana Limited into the personal account of the project consultant, Dr Boadu.
They were arraigned on October 14, 2002 on three counts of conspiracy, two counts of defrauding and two counts of wilfully causing financial loss to the state but both of them pleaded not guilty to the charges and were granted self-recognisance bail.
Selormey, however, died in the course of the trial.
Meanwhile, Abodakpi’s counsel in his amended grounds of appeal said the trial judge erred in disregarding the evidence of the defence without any reason and described the sentence as unreasonable, excessive, baseless and totally unsupported by the facts and the evidence adduced at the trial.
He stated that the judge failed to make any findings of the specific intent necessary to prove the charges levelled against the appellant.
He said the trial judge erred in refusing to give reasons for imposing the maximum custodial sentence on the appellant.
Counsel said the judge erred in placing undue reliance on the designation of feasibility study in correspondence about the payments to Dr Frederick Boadu when the evidence of the prosecution clearly showed that the designation was irrelevant to the making of the payments.
PASTOR TESTIFIES IN PRESIDENT'S ACCIDENT CASE
Reverend King Joe Osei Kuffuor, the man whose VW Golf car was affected by the accident involving President Kufuor, has told the Accra Fast Track High Court that it was not the policeman on duty at the Opeibea intersection who stopped him to give way to the Presidential convoy.
Rather, he stopped by himself to allow the Presidential convoy to pass when he heard the siren blurring.
Rev Kuffuor was testifying under cross-examination from Mr Kwame Boafo Akuffo, counsel for Thomas Osei, the man at the centre of the accident which occurred last November.
The witness is the third for the prosecution.
Osei was first arraigned before the Motor Court on November 16, 2007 and remanded.
He was discharged by the court on Thursday, December 20, 2007 after the prosecution had filed a nolle prosequi (unwilling to prosecute) but he was re-arrested when he stepped out of the court and put before the Fast Track High court on six counts.
Osei now faces seven counts of use of narcotic drugs, dangerous driving, negligently causing harm, driving under the influence of alcohol, failing to give way to a Presidential convoy and failing to effect change of ownership of vehicle, to which he has pleaded not guilty.
Around 11.30 a.m. on November 14, 2007, Osei, who was driving a Mercedes Benz SE 500 saloon car in the inner lane along the Liberation Link from the direction of Aviance towards the 37 Military Hospital, drove into the rear side of the President’s vehicle, in spite of the fact that other motorists had been stopped to allow the President’s convoy to pass.
The driver of the President’s car and the driver of a VW saloon car were treated and discharged, while Osei was admitted for treatment.
The President escaped unhurt.
Rev Kuffuor said when he stopped for the convoy to pass the traffic lights at the intersection were working and he had the right of way because the light in his direction had shown green.
He agreed with counsel that he would not be in a position to know whether the traffic light in the direction of the accused person was showing red or not.
According to the witness, he was also not in a position to testify whether when the accused person’s car reached the intersection he (accused person) could not hear the siren blurring.
He agreed with counsel that a car moving from the Aviance direction of the intersection towards the Alliance Francaise area would use the left lane of the road.
Rev Kuffuor said that while he had stopped, he notice other cars, including that of the accused person, with Osei’s moving and coming behind a taxi cab in front of it.
He disagreed with counsel that cars which were in the same direction as the accused person’s did not concern him, likewise the Presidential convoy.
The witness further disagreed with counsel that he was made a prosecution witness in order to avoid being prosecuted for deficiencies about him after investigations into the accident were completed.
He disagreed with suggestions that he was not a man of God but rather assumed that role to deceive the flock.
Rather, he stopped by himself to allow the Presidential convoy to pass when he heard the siren blurring.
Rev Kuffuor was testifying under cross-examination from Mr Kwame Boafo Akuffo, counsel for Thomas Osei, the man at the centre of the accident which occurred last November.
The witness is the third for the prosecution.
Osei was first arraigned before the Motor Court on November 16, 2007 and remanded.
He was discharged by the court on Thursday, December 20, 2007 after the prosecution had filed a nolle prosequi (unwilling to prosecute) but he was re-arrested when he stepped out of the court and put before the Fast Track High court on six counts.
Osei now faces seven counts of use of narcotic drugs, dangerous driving, negligently causing harm, driving under the influence of alcohol, failing to give way to a Presidential convoy and failing to effect change of ownership of vehicle, to which he has pleaded not guilty.
Around 11.30 a.m. on November 14, 2007, Osei, who was driving a Mercedes Benz SE 500 saloon car in the inner lane along the Liberation Link from the direction of Aviance towards the 37 Military Hospital, drove into the rear side of the President’s vehicle, in spite of the fact that other motorists had been stopped to allow the President’s convoy to pass.
The driver of the President’s car and the driver of a VW saloon car were treated and discharged, while Osei was admitted for treatment.
The President escaped unhurt.
Rev Kuffuor said when he stopped for the convoy to pass the traffic lights at the intersection were working and he had the right of way because the light in his direction had shown green.
He agreed with counsel that he would not be in a position to know whether the traffic light in the direction of the accused person was showing red or not.
According to the witness, he was also not in a position to testify whether when the accused person’s car reached the intersection he (accused person) could not hear the siren blurring.
He agreed with counsel that a car moving from the Aviance direction of the intersection towards the Alliance Francaise area would use the left lane of the road.
Rev Kuffuor said that while he had stopped, he notice other cars, including that of the accused person, with Osei’s moving and coming behind a taxi cab in front of it.
He disagreed with counsel that cars which were in the same direction as the accused person’s did not concern him, likewise the Presidential convoy.
The witness further disagreed with counsel that he was made a prosecution witness in order to avoid being prosecuted for deficiencies about him after investigations into the accident were completed.
He disagreed with suggestions that he was not a man of God but rather assumed that role to deceive the flock.
HIGH COURT CONVICTS SG-SSB BOSS
AN Accra High Court has convicted the Managing Director of the SG-SSB Bank Ltd, Mr Alain Bellisard, for contempt of court for failing to obey its order.
The court had, on March 26, 2006, ordered the bank to surrender title deeds on a house at Lever Avenue in Sekondi in the Western Region to Gbewaa Civil Engineering Ltd but it refused.
Following the refusal of the bank to surrender the documents, the company applied to the court for an order to commit the bank, particularly its managing director, for contempt of court, which the court upheld.
It admitted the managing director to self-recognisance bail in the sum of GH¢20,000 and gave him 14 days within which to purge himself.
When the case was called on Tuesday, Mr Bellisard was not in court but a letter was produced to the effect that he was indisposed.
The court, therefore, adjourned the sentence to January 29, 2008, by which time if he had purged himself to surrender the document, the court would decide what to do with him.
Gbewaa Civil Engineering Ltd contracted a loan from the bank in 2002 and used the documents as collateral until the loan was repaid.
After that the bank took the applicants to court on the grounds that the company had not finished with the payment but the court, after going into the matter, ruled that the documents should be surrendered because the company was not indebted to the bank.
In its contempt application, Gbewaa Ltd said although when the court gave its order that the respondent bank should surrender the documents its managing director was not in court, the bank’s counsel was present.
It said subsequently the order was served on the bank but it refused to comply with the order.
The bank’s counsel opposed the contempt application because, according to him, it was misconceived and incompetent because the present managing director, a French national, had assumed office in Ghana at a time when the court order had long been given.
Furthermore, the respondent argued that the convict had not been served with the court order, the subject of contempt, and that by the date of service of the said processes on him the bank had long since filed an appeal against the order, while an application for stay of execution pending appeal against the order had been filed as far back as June 14, 2006.
The bank denied having committed any contempt of court in the circumstances.
However, the court ruled that the relevant evidence available was that on April 19, 2006 the order was delivered to the managing director’s office, whereupon his secretary directed the bailiff to serve the order on the Recovery Unit of the bank.
It said the managing director’s secretary understood the order and, therefore, directed the bailiff to the immediate relevant unit of the bank and that in the normal scheme of things, the Secretary at the Recovery Unit, Madam Beatrice Quarshie, had received the document as an official document for and on behalf of her employers, the bank.
The court ruled that it was immaterial that the present managing director was not in office at the time of service of the court order on the bank and that the fact of the matter was that the managing director took office with all the responsibilities and duties attached to the office.
“It will be preposterous to think otherwise. The managing director in office is attachable, once it has been proved that the court’s order has been disobeyed by the respondent bank,” said the court.
Similarly, the court ruled that the two processes relied on by counsel for the bank, namely, a notice of appeal and a motion for stay of execution pending appeal, that the respondent could not be deemed to have disobeyed the court’s order were unfortunate because a mere notice of appeal did not by itself operate as an order of stay of execution. It said in spite of the respondent’s grievance against the court order complained of, until the Court of Appeal reversed the order, the respondents ought to obey it.
Notwithstanding the respondent’s notice of appeal against the order, the court said the proper thing for the respondent to have done was to obey the order rather than wrongly choosing, on legal advice, to disregard it.
It said “by his choice of wilful disobedience of the order, the respondent has fallen liable in contempt of this court. I, accordingly, hereby convict the managing director of the bank as the first officer of the bank”.
The court had, on March 26, 2006, ordered the bank to surrender title deeds on a house at Lever Avenue in Sekondi in the Western Region to Gbewaa Civil Engineering Ltd but it refused.
Following the refusal of the bank to surrender the documents, the company applied to the court for an order to commit the bank, particularly its managing director, for contempt of court, which the court upheld.
It admitted the managing director to self-recognisance bail in the sum of GH¢20,000 and gave him 14 days within which to purge himself.
When the case was called on Tuesday, Mr Bellisard was not in court but a letter was produced to the effect that he was indisposed.
The court, therefore, adjourned the sentence to January 29, 2008, by which time if he had purged himself to surrender the document, the court would decide what to do with him.
Gbewaa Civil Engineering Ltd contracted a loan from the bank in 2002 and used the documents as collateral until the loan was repaid.
After that the bank took the applicants to court on the grounds that the company had not finished with the payment but the court, after going into the matter, ruled that the documents should be surrendered because the company was not indebted to the bank.
In its contempt application, Gbewaa Ltd said although when the court gave its order that the respondent bank should surrender the documents its managing director was not in court, the bank’s counsel was present.
It said subsequently the order was served on the bank but it refused to comply with the order.
The bank’s counsel opposed the contempt application because, according to him, it was misconceived and incompetent because the present managing director, a French national, had assumed office in Ghana at a time when the court order had long been given.
Furthermore, the respondent argued that the convict had not been served with the court order, the subject of contempt, and that by the date of service of the said processes on him the bank had long since filed an appeal against the order, while an application for stay of execution pending appeal against the order had been filed as far back as June 14, 2006.
The bank denied having committed any contempt of court in the circumstances.
However, the court ruled that the relevant evidence available was that on April 19, 2006 the order was delivered to the managing director’s office, whereupon his secretary directed the bailiff to serve the order on the Recovery Unit of the bank.
It said the managing director’s secretary understood the order and, therefore, directed the bailiff to the immediate relevant unit of the bank and that in the normal scheme of things, the Secretary at the Recovery Unit, Madam Beatrice Quarshie, had received the document as an official document for and on behalf of her employers, the bank.
The court ruled that it was immaterial that the present managing director was not in office at the time of service of the court order on the bank and that the fact of the matter was that the managing director took office with all the responsibilities and duties attached to the office.
“It will be preposterous to think otherwise. The managing director in office is attachable, once it has been proved that the court’s order has been disobeyed by the respondent bank,” said the court.
Similarly, the court ruled that the two processes relied on by counsel for the bank, namely, a notice of appeal and a motion for stay of execution pending appeal, that the respondent could not be deemed to have disobeyed the court’s order were unfortunate because a mere notice of appeal did not by itself operate as an order of stay of execution. It said in spite of the respondent’s grievance against the court order complained of, until the Court of Appeal reversed the order, the respondents ought to obey it.
Notwithstanding the respondent’s notice of appeal against the order, the court said the proper thing for the respondent to have done was to obey the order rather than wrongly choosing, on legal advice, to disregard it.
It said “by his choice of wilful disobedience of the order, the respondent has fallen liable in contempt of this court. I, accordingly, hereby convict the managing director of the bank as the first officer of the bank”.
HIGH COURT RESTRAINS SHELL
AN Accra Fast Track High Court has restrained Shell Ghana Limited from terminating the dealership agreement between the company and 17 of its dealers in Kumasi and Accra.
According to the court, once evidence had not been taken in the substantive case, any termination of the agreement would be an exercise in futility.
It, therefore, upheld a motion for interlocutory injunction filed by the plaintiffs against Shell and adjourned the matter sine die.
The court, however, ordered the dealers to make an undertaken within two weeks to pay substantial compensation to Shell if they lost the case.
The dealers sued Shell to seek an order to annul the termination of their dealership agreement which the company said took effect from December 31, 2007.
They described the exercise as null, void, inequitable and unconscionable because they had not been given reasonable notices.
They are further seeking an order to set aside the purported notice of termination or intention not to renew their dealership on the grounds that the notices were unreasonably short, unconscionable, unfair and unlawful.
The court could not hear the motion for injunction last Friday because of procedural problems and, therefore, awarded costs of GH¢200 against Shell and adjourned the matter to yesterday.
The plaintiffs are Godfrey Motey Addo, Esther Mullings, Rebecca Tagoe, Thompson Obimpeh, Osei Bonsu, Ambrose Kumassah, Benjamin Boateng, De-Kuza Akuetey, Titus Owens-Dey, George Russel Teye, Lucy Osafo Agyekum, Emmanuel Inkoom and Samuel Aidoo, all of Accra.
The rest are Robert Osei Bonsu, Richard Puni, Emmanuel Kwasi Donkor and Justice Acheampong, all of Kumasi.
Arguing the motion, counsel for the plaintiffs, Mr S.K. Amoah, said the dealers had worked for Shell variously for periods ranging between one and 30 years and that the last dealership agreement executed between them and Shell was in 2005, which expired in December of that year.
According to him, the plaintiffs had been operating their respective dealerships without any formal agreement since the expiration of the agreement.
He said there was no evidence of renewal of the agreement but the plaintiffs continued to operate in that capacity after an oral agreement between the parties.
Following that arrangement, counsel said the court ought to restrain the defendant because where revocation was without reasonable notice, the court had always restrained.
The plaintiffs, counsel said, had invested huge sums of money in their businesses involving Shell and non-Shell products, equipment and other materials in order to maintain the business of the defendant.
Mr Amoah said the nature and requirements of Shell’s business compelled his clients to rely on loans from their banks to enable them to execute the dealership agreement for the benefit of the defendant company.
He said the agreement between his clients and Shell was not a contract of service, for which reason they had a right to be protected by the injunction.
He said the plaintiffs would incur heavy losses resulting from their inability to dispose of the non-Shell products within the short time that the notice was given and, therefore, the defendant should be restrained, since the company would not suffer any hardship or inconvenience.
Mr Daniel Amarteifio, counsel for Shell, even though opposed the motion and urged the court not to entertain it, admitted that the last agreement between the parties expired in December 2005.
He said no new agreement was executed but the parties continued to regulate their relationship according to the terms of the expired agreement.
Counsel asked the court not to grant the motion because once the plaintiffs had quantified the losses in monetary value, they could be compensated for any losses.
According to him, to ask for reasonable notice amounted to varying the terms of the agreement, adding that so long as the parties continued to regulate their activities, as was contained in the expired agreement, it meant there was a contract between them, the expiration of which could not be enforced in the court.
Mr Amarteifio said a contract of service could not be retrained by an injunction.
According to the court, once evidence had not been taken in the substantive case, any termination of the agreement would be an exercise in futility.
It, therefore, upheld a motion for interlocutory injunction filed by the plaintiffs against Shell and adjourned the matter sine die.
The court, however, ordered the dealers to make an undertaken within two weeks to pay substantial compensation to Shell if they lost the case.
The dealers sued Shell to seek an order to annul the termination of their dealership agreement which the company said took effect from December 31, 2007.
They described the exercise as null, void, inequitable and unconscionable because they had not been given reasonable notices.
They are further seeking an order to set aside the purported notice of termination or intention not to renew their dealership on the grounds that the notices were unreasonably short, unconscionable, unfair and unlawful.
The court could not hear the motion for injunction last Friday because of procedural problems and, therefore, awarded costs of GH¢200 against Shell and adjourned the matter to yesterday.
The plaintiffs are Godfrey Motey Addo, Esther Mullings, Rebecca Tagoe, Thompson Obimpeh, Osei Bonsu, Ambrose Kumassah, Benjamin Boateng, De-Kuza Akuetey, Titus Owens-Dey, George Russel Teye, Lucy Osafo Agyekum, Emmanuel Inkoom and Samuel Aidoo, all of Accra.
The rest are Robert Osei Bonsu, Richard Puni, Emmanuel Kwasi Donkor and Justice Acheampong, all of Kumasi.
Arguing the motion, counsel for the plaintiffs, Mr S.K. Amoah, said the dealers had worked for Shell variously for periods ranging between one and 30 years and that the last dealership agreement executed between them and Shell was in 2005, which expired in December of that year.
According to him, the plaintiffs had been operating their respective dealerships without any formal agreement since the expiration of the agreement.
He said there was no evidence of renewal of the agreement but the plaintiffs continued to operate in that capacity after an oral agreement between the parties.
Following that arrangement, counsel said the court ought to restrain the defendant because where revocation was without reasonable notice, the court had always restrained.
The plaintiffs, counsel said, had invested huge sums of money in their businesses involving Shell and non-Shell products, equipment and other materials in order to maintain the business of the defendant.
Mr Amoah said the nature and requirements of Shell’s business compelled his clients to rely on loans from their banks to enable them to execute the dealership agreement for the benefit of the defendant company.
He said the agreement between his clients and Shell was not a contract of service, for which reason they had a right to be protected by the injunction.
He said the plaintiffs would incur heavy losses resulting from their inability to dispose of the non-Shell products within the short time that the notice was given and, therefore, the defendant should be restrained, since the company would not suffer any hardship or inconvenience.
Mr Daniel Amarteifio, counsel for Shell, even though opposed the motion and urged the court not to entertain it, admitted that the last agreement between the parties expired in December 2005.
He said no new agreement was executed but the parties continued to regulate their relationship according to the terms of the expired agreement.
Counsel asked the court not to grant the motion because once the plaintiffs had quantified the losses in monetary value, they could be compensated for any losses.
According to him, to ask for reasonable notice amounted to varying the terms of the agreement, adding that so long as the parties continued to regulate their activities, as was contained in the expired agreement, it meant there was a contract between them, the expiration of which could not be enforced in the court.
Mr Amarteifio said a contract of service could not be retrained by an injunction.
SUPREME COURT DISMISSES GBESE SUIT
THE Supreme Court has dismissed a motion filed by Nii Tetteh Ahinakwa II and Nii Ayi Bonte II, known in private life as Thomas Okine, of the Akwetey Krobo Saki We of Gbese for a judicial review of an Accra High Court decision in favour of Nii Okaidja III (Bill Annan), the Gbese Mantse, and two others.
The court unanimously ruled that where the decision of the lower court was regularly given, judicial review by the Supreme Court was misplaced and that if the applicants were dissatisfied with the lower court’s ruling, they ought to have appealed, rather than go to the Supreme Court.
It awarded costs of GH¢1,000 against the applicants.
The applicants invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to set aside the High Court ruling of September 26, 2007, award damages and an order of perpetual injunction against Nii Okaidja, Percy Okoe and Okoe Aryee, the interested parties.
However, Nii Okaidja and the others raised a preliminary objection to the motion.
The grounds for the review by the applicants were that the lower court was not clothed with jurisdiction to entertain the matter and, therefore, the judge ought to have struck it out because Nii Okaidja and the others had no locus standi, while there were a series of estoppel and contempt cases against them.
The Supreme Court, however, ruled that those were not known grounds for review, although judicial review was one method by which the court exercised the power granted it by the Constitution to ensure that the lower courts were within the powers conferred on them.
According to the court, the lower court had jurisdiction to entertain the issue raised in the matter that was brought before it.
The Supreme Court said the remedy of judicial review was not open to the applicants and cited many cases to outline the scope of its jurisdiction.
It said although it had jurisdiction in chieftaincy matters, that was the final appellate court regarding those matters and for that reason it upheld the preliminary objection raised by Nii Okaidja and the others.
The court was presided over by Justice Sophia Akuffo, with Justices Julius Ansah, Richard Twum Aninakwa, Sophia Adinyira and S.K. Asiamah as the members.
The Gbese chieftaincy dispute took a new twist following an Accra High Court order on Monday, January 21, 2008 that Nii Okaidja III should take possession of the Gbese palace by 6.05 p.m. that day.
The court restrained Nii Tetteh Ahinakwa II and Nii Ayi Bonte II from interfering with the possession, control and right of occupation of the palace so long as Nii Okaidja remained the Gbese Mantse.
It ordered them to vacate the Gbese palace by 6.00 p.m. on Monday and awarded costs of GH¢500 in favour of the plaintiffs.
The court gave the order in its judgement in the case in which Nii Okaidja and two others sued Nii Ahinakwa and Thomas Okine and sought an order to set aside the writ of possession of the High Court pursuant to leave granted by the court on May 22, 2007 because it was illegal and unlawful.
The plaintiffs also sought for an order of perpetual injunction to restrain the defendant from entering the Gbese palace or in any way interfere with the possession, control and right of occupation of the palace.
The defendants, however, described the judgement as unfortunate because the plaintiffs had no locus in taking over the palace.
A source close to the plaintiffs hinted that an application for a stay of execution pending appeal in the matter had been filed, since there had been a Supreme Court ruling in their favour, while a contempt case was also pending against the plaintiffs.
According to the court, by the terms of the Greater Accra Regional House of Chiefs on February 17, 2003, it was the one who became the Gbese chief who should be entitled to all immovable property of the stool, and having found Nii Okaidja to have established his status as the Gbese chief, he was the one and only person entitled to the Gbese palace, so long as he remained the chief.
The court held that throughout the trial no evidence was brought to show that any elder of Gbese, the king makers or any person from the Dzaase had instituted any destoolment proceeding against Nii Okaidja in any legally recognised or competent chieftaincy tribunal and procured any adverse findings that Nii Okaidja was liable to be destooled.
“Is it not a disturbing state of condition, indeed an awkward unintended arrangement, that while Nii Okaidja remains the functional Gbese Mantse, the functional tools of the office of the Gbese chief should be under the control of an opponent by his occupation of the Gbese stool?” the court queried.
It said it did not think the legal objections raised against the plaintiffs had enough potency to gag especially Nii Okaidja from instituting the action in the court and, therefore, did not see the circumstances under which to deny him the right to take the action.
The court said Nii Okaidja had pleaded that he was installed Gbese Mantse by the king makers and the Dzaase of Gbese on October 8, 2006 and led evidence to fortify that averment without any challenge from the defendants.
It said the judgement being relied on against Nii Okaidja predated his installation as chief of Gbese, while it had never come across the mention of Nii Okaidja as party to any of the matters in the courts over the past years.
The court unanimously ruled that where the decision of the lower court was regularly given, judicial review by the Supreme Court was misplaced and that if the applicants were dissatisfied with the lower court’s ruling, they ought to have appealed, rather than go to the Supreme Court.
It awarded costs of GH¢1,000 against the applicants.
The applicants invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to set aside the High Court ruling of September 26, 2007, award damages and an order of perpetual injunction against Nii Okaidja, Percy Okoe and Okoe Aryee, the interested parties.
However, Nii Okaidja and the others raised a preliminary objection to the motion.
The grounds for the review by the applicants were that the lower court was not clothed with jurisdiction to entertain the matter and, therefore, the judge ought to have struck it out because Nii Okaidja and the others had no locus standi, while there were a series of estoppel and contempt cases against them.
The Supreme Court, however, ruled that those were not known grounds for review, although judicial review was one method by which the court exercised the power granted it by the Constitution to ensure that the lower courts were within the powers conferred on them.
According to the court, the lower court had jurisdiction to entertain the issue raised in the matter that was brought before it.
The Supreme Court said the remedy of judicial review was not open to the applicants and cited many cases to outline the scope of its jurisdiction.
It said although it had jurisdiction in chieftaincy matters, that was the final appellate court regarding those matters and for that reason it upheld the preliminary objection raised by Nii Okaidja and the others.
The court was presided over by Justice Sophia Akuffo, with Justices Julius Ansah, Richard Twum Aninakwa, Sophia Adinyira and S.K. Asiamah as the members.
The Gbese chieftaincy dispute took a new twist following an Accra High Court order on Monday, January 21, 2008 that Nii Okaidja III should take possession of the Gbese palace by 6.05 p.m. that day.
The court restrained Nii Tetteh Ahinakwa II and Nii Ayi Bonte II from interfering with the possession, control and right of occupation of the palace so long as Nii Okaidja remained the Gbese Mantse.
It ordered them to vacate the Gbese palace by 6.00 p.m. on Monday and awarded costs of GH¢500 in favour of the plaintiffs.
The court gave the order in its judgement in the case in which Nii Okaidja and two others sued Nii Ahinakwa and Thomas Okine and sought an order to set aside the writ of possession of the High Court pursuant to leave granted by the court on May 22, 2007 because it was illegal and unlawful.
The plaintiffs also sought for an order of perpetual injunction to restrain the defendant from entering the Gbese palace or in any way interfere with the possession, control and right of occupation of the palace.
The defendants, however, described the judgement as unfortunate because the plaintiffs had no locus in taking over the palace.
A source close to the plaintiffs hinted that an application for a stay of execution pending appeal in the matter had been filed, since there had been a Supreme Court ruling in their favour, while a contempt case was also pending against the plaintiffs.
According to the court, by the terms of the Greater Accra Regional House of Chiefs on February 17, 2003, it was the one who became the Gbese chief who should be entitled to all immovable property of the stool, and having found Nii Okaidja to have established his status as the Gbese chief, he was the one and only person entitled to the Gbese palace, so long as he remained the chief.
The court held that throughout the trial no evidence was brought to show that any elder of Gbese, the king makers or any person from the Dzaase had instituted any destoolment proceeding against Nii Okaidja in any legally recognised or competent chieftaincy tribunal and procured any adverse findings that Nii Okaidja was liable to be destooled.
“Is it not a disturbing state of condition, indeed an awkward unintended arrangement, that while Nii Okaidja remains the functional Gbese Mantse, the functional tools of the office of the Gbese chief should be under the control of an opponent by his occupation of the Gbese stool?” the court queried.
It said it did not think the legal objections raised against the plaintiffs had enough potency to gag especially Nii Okaidja from instituting the action in the court and, therefore, did not see the circumstances under which to deny him the right to take the action.
The court said Nii Okaidja had pleaded that he was installed Gbese Mantse by the king makers and the Dzaase of Gbese on October 8, 2006 and led evidence to fortify that averment without any challenge from the defendants.
It said the judgement being relied on against Nii Okaidja predated his installation as chief of Gbese, while it had never come across the mention of Nii Okaidja as party to any of the matters in the courts over the past years.
COURT HEARS CASE AGAINST GIMPA RECTOR
THE Accra Fast Track High Court has begun hearing the case in which Mr Egbert Isaac Faibille Jnr is seeking an order to restrain Dr Stephen Adei from holding himself out as the Rector and professor of the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA).
Mr Faibille wants the court to order that Dr Adei is not a professor, either at GIMPA or any other institution, and should, therefore, be restrained from holding himself out as such.
He further wants the court to order GIMPA to advertise the position of Rector, since it was vacant because, according to him, when the tenure of office of Dr Adei expired on October 1, 2004, he had not been re-appointed as Rector.
Led in evidence by his counsel, Mr Faibille said it was a very big fraud being perpetuated on students and the people of Ghana if Dr Adei was allowed to use the title ‘professor’ and also allowed to be at post in such a public institution.
Mr Faibille, who is a lawyer and publisher of the Ghanaian Observer newspaper, has sued Dr Adei, the Governing Council of GIMPA and GIMPA as an entity.
According to him, Dr Adei was appointed by the then Court of Governors of GIMPA as Director-General of GIMPA on October 1, 1999 for a five-year term. However, after the expiration of his tenure in October 2004, Dr Adei was still at post.
He said when Dr Adei’s term of office expired, Dr Adei verbally told the GIMPA Governing Council to renew his appointment, after which he was appointed as the acting Rector from January 1, 2005.
The plaintiff said beyond that no letter or communication had been sent to Dr Adei confirming his appointment in the acting capacity.
Dr Adei, he said, was not duly appointed for the period that he had been in office from October 1, 2005 to date, adding that GIMPA was a public institution and so the anomaly must be properly handled.
“The conduct of the defendants has been most irregular and improper, against the background that GIMPA is a cherished public tertiary institution,” he stated.
Mr Faibille noted that the first time he realised that Dr Adei had been holding himself out as a professor was on July 5, 2002 when the Daily Graphic published a story about his appointment by a Zimbabwe-based institution which was affiliated to the University of Zimbabwe.
He said research that he (the plaintiff) conducted on GIMPA indicated that Dr Adei was a Professor in Leadership but added that the GIMPA statute states that the position of a full professor could not be earned unless the applicant first applied for an associate professorship and went through a vetting procedure.
Mr Faibille said Dr Adei had never been vetted by the GIMPA promotion committee, even if he had been appointed a professor by any institution, as required, and that an assertion by the GIMPA governing body that it was aware of the appointment was not correct.
He questioned how the body could rely on only a newspaper report to base its assertion, since the report could be false, saying that “the African Leadership and Management Academy based in Zimbabwe has not appointed Dr Adei as a professor, neither has it conferred a professorial title, whether full, associate or adjunct, on him”.
“Records at GIMPA show that Dr Adei has not been vetted for the professorial position he claims. He must be restrained because now that the issue has come out that the governing body inherited minutes of a meeting during which Dr Adei’s appointment was mentioned then it means that the procedure has not been followed.
“The fact that the council is aware of Dr Adei’ professorial position is even dangerous because it is coming from a newspaper publication, especially when it can be false,” he said.
Mr Faibille further described as more dangerous the GIMPA Governing Council’s assertion that it was taking steps to confer a full professor on Dr Adei, since, from the statute of GIMPA, it was clear that the first position was an associate professor, after which one was eligible to apply for a full professorship.
He said Dr Adei was not an associate professor at GIMPA and he did not meet the conditions to apply for a full professor since he had been an adjunct professor of the Zimbabwe-based institute.
Hearing continues.
Mr Faibille wants the court to order that Dr Adei is not a professor, either at GIMPA or any other institution, and should, therefore, be restrained from holding himself out as such.
He further wants the court to order GIMPA to advertise the position of Rector, since it was vacant because, according to him, when the tenure of office of Dr Adei expired on October 1, 2004, he had not been re-appointed as Rector.
Led in evidence by his counsel, Mr Faibille said it was a very big fraud being perpetuated on students and the people of Ghana if Dr Adei was allowed to use the title ‘professor’ and also allowed to be at post in such a public institution.
Mr Faibille, who is a lawyer and publisher of the Ghanaian Observer newspaper, has sued Dr Adei, the Governing Council of GIMPA and GIMPA as an entity.
According to him, Dr Adei was appointed by the then Court of Governors of GIMPA as Director-General of GIMPA on October 1, 1999 for a five-year term. However, after the expiration of his tenure in October 2004, Dr Adei was still at post.
He said when Dr Adei’s term of office expired, Dr Adei verbally told the GIMPA Governing Council to renew his appointment, after which he was appointed as the acting Rector from January 1, 2005.
The plaintiff said beyond that no letter or communication had been sent to Dr Adei confirming his appointment in the acting capacity.
Dr Adei, he said, was not duly appointed for the period that he had been in office from October 1, 2005 to date, adding that GIMPA was a public institution and so the anomaly must be properly handled.
“The conduct of the defendants has been most irregular and improper, against the background that GIMPA is a cherished public tertiary institution,” he stated.
Mr Faibille noted that the first time he realised that Dr Adei had been holding himself out as a professor was on July 5, 2002 when the Daily Graphic published a story about his appointment by a Zimbabwe-based institution which was affiliated to the University of Zimbabwe.
He said research that he (the plaintiff) conducted on GIMPA indicated that Dr Adei was a Professor in Leadership but added that the GIMPA statute states that the position of a full professor could not be earned unless the applicant first applied for an associate professorship and went through a vetting procedure.
Mr Faibille said Dr Adei had never been vetted by the GIMPA promotion committee, even if he had been appointed a professor by any institution, as required, and that an assertion by the GIMPA governing body that it was aware of the appointment was not correct.
He questioned how the body could rely on only a newspaper report to base its assertion, since the report could be false, saying that “the African Leadership and Management Academy based in Zimbabwe has not appointed Dr Adei as a professor, neither has it conferred a professorial title, whether full, associate or adjunct, on him”.
“Records at GIMPA show that Dr Adei has not been vetted for the professorial position he claims. He must be restrained because now that the issue has come out that the governing body inherited minutes of a meeting during which Dr Adei’s appointment was mentioned then it means that the procedure has not been followed.
“The fact that the council is aware of Dr Adei’ professorial position is even dangerous because it is coming from a newspaper publication, especially when it can be false,” he said.
Mr Faibille further described as more dangerous the GIMPA Governing Council’s assertion that it was taking steps to confer a full professor on Dr Adei, since, from the statute of GIMPA, it was clear that the first position was an associate professor, after which one was eligible to apply for a full professorship.
He said Dr Adei was not an associate professor at GIMPA and he did not meet the conditions to apply for a full professor since he had been an adjunct professor of the Zimbabwe-based institute.
Hearing continues.
DEALERS SUE SHELL GHANA
SEVENTEEN Shell Ghana Limited dealers have sued the company at an Accra Fast Track High Court, seeking an order to annul the termination of their dealership agreement.
The company terminated the dealership agreement with the dealers who operate in Accra and Kumasi with effect from December 31, 2007, but, according to the dealers, it was null, void, inequitable and unconscionable because they were not given reasonable notices.
Consequently, they are seeking an order of perpetual injunction to restrain Shell or anybody claiming authority through the company from unlawfully interfering with their business.
They are further seeking an order to set aside the purported notice of termination or intention not to renew their dealership on the grounds that the notices were unreasonably short, unconscionable, unfair and unlawful.
The court could not hear the motion for injunction last Friday because of procedural problems and, therefore, awarded costs of GH¢200 against Shell and adjourned the matter to Thursday, January 24, 2008.
An affidavit deposed on behalf of the plaintiffs by Godfrey Motey Addo of Accra said the dealers had worked for Shell variously for periods ranging between one and 30 years and that the last dealership agreement executed between them and Shell was in 2005, which expired in December of that year.
According to them, they had been operating their respective dealerships without any formal agreement. However, by a letter dated October 8, 2007 and addressed to them, Shell indicated that it would not renew the 2005 agreement.
The plaintiffs said Shell requested them to apply to be considered for engagement under a “new operator platform” from January 2008 but they could not apply.
They said the nature and requirements of Shell’s business compelled them to rely on loans from their banks to enable them to execute the dealership agreement for the benefit of the company.
“We have committed ourselves to repay the said loans to our respective bankers which cannot be paid if reasonable notice of termination of the dealership agreement is not given,” the plaintiffs said.
Furthermore, the plaintiffs said that they had entered into agreements with their creditors and if the dealership agreement was terminated without incurring liabilities such as the payment of damages, reasonable notice was required by them for the termination of their dealership.
They said that they would incur heavy losses resulting from their inability to dispose of the non-Shell products within the short time that the notice was given and, therefore, the defendant should be restrained, since the company would not suffer any hardship or inconvenience.
The company terminated the dealership agreement with the dealers who operate in Accra and Kumasi with effect from December 31, 2007, but, according to the dealers, it was null, void, inequitable and unconscionable because they were not given reasonable notices.
Consequently, they are seeking an order of perpetual injunction to restrain Shell or anybody claiming authority through the company from unlawfully interfering with their business.
They are further seeking an order to set aside the purported notice of termination or intention not to renew their dealership on the grounds that the notices were unreasonably short, unconscionable, unfair and unlawful.
The court could not hear the motion for injunction last Friday because of procedural problems and, therefore, awarded costs of GH¢200 against Shell and adjourned the matter to Thursday, January 24, 2008.
An affidavit deposed on behalf of the plaintiffs by Godfrey Motey Addo of Accra said the dealers had worked for Shell variously for periods ranging between one and 30 years and that the last dealership agreement executed between them and Shell was in 2005, which expired in December of that year.
According to them, they had been operating their respective dealerships without any formal agreement. However, by a letter dated October 8, 2007 and addressed to them, Shell indicated that it would not renew the 2005 agreement.
The plaintiffs said Shell requested them to apply to be considered for engagement under a “new operator platform” from January 2008 but they could not apply.
They said the nature and requirements of Shell’s business compelled them to rely on loans from their banks to enable them to execute the dealership agreement for the benefit of the company.
“We have committed ourselves to repay the said loans to our respective bankers which cannot be paid if reasonable notice of termination of the dealership agreement is not given,” the plaintiffs said.
Furthermore, the plaintiffs said that they had entered into agreements with their creditors and if the dealership agreement was terminated without incurring liabilities such as the payment of damages, reasonable notice was required by them for the termination of their dealership.
They said that they would incur heavy losses resulting from their inability to dispose of the non-Shell products within the short time that the notice was given and, therefore, the defendant should be restrained, since the company would not suffer any hardship or inconvenience.
Friday, January 18, 2008
SETTING A STRONG STYAGE FOR GHANA'S ELECTIONS
Story: Stephen Sah
IT is a truism that this year’s general election is a test case for Ghana to showcase to the rest of the world that it has reached a no turning point in her quest to deepen and entrench her democracy.
The political topography is changing and maturing, and this must be sustained. Ghanaians must demonstrate this by successfully coming out of the December election unscathed. Indeed, Ghana is the island of peace and tranquility.
We need not give room for anything unruly to happen in order to lend credence to that accolade. The time to show that we are politically maturing is now, and this is a task which can only be accomplished only if we exhibit extreme tolerance, camaraderie, fortitude and accept divergent views or ideas to extricate the country from some of the unnecessary post-election crisis being experienced or suffered in other parts of the world, especially on the African continent. As the shining star of Africa, Ghana must indeed lead by example for others to emulate, so that her success story will serve as a laboratory for research into the woes that continue to plague the other turbulent democracies on the African continent.
Preparations are currently underway for the December elections after the major political parties have selected their flag bearers. The stage is now set for what should promise to be refreshing electioneering. Ghana expects nothing, but a clean campaign, devoid of rancour, inflammatory language and insults.
For Ghana to have a completely clean slate, everybody and all institutions in the country should play their roles towards the successful election that we yearn for. The politicians themselves, the media, the Judiciary, the Electoral Commission (EC), the electorate and, in fact, the youth on whose shoulders the future of this country rests. What is happening in other countries should be a reminder to us that nothing should be left to chance. That Ghanaians are a peaceful and loving people, and Ghana is a God-fearing country is a complacent self-congratulation which does not take us anywhere. If we do not take care, we may be taken by events. We should discard the assertion that the turbulence in other countries cannot occur in our country.
At least, we should be inspired by the fine things that are said about us and not think that Ghanaians fear bloodletting. Should we throw our dear and peaceful country into violence, there will be no safe haven anywhere in the sub-region for us. As the island that we are, we will be thrown into the simmering waters that surround us. Our country will be so debilitated to the extent that the women and children who form the majority and the base of our development and progress will suffer.
In the event of any disturbances, we should not forget that the rich and politicians will continue to live in affluence at plush areas and also send their relatives abroad. While that happens, they will continue to fuel the violence for the sake of their interests so that the poor continue kill themselves. So you see why we should not let them take us for granted?
Our political leaders cannot take the masses for a ride this time round and think that they will be supported after throwing the country into a mess. Their political campaigns should not be done on tribal lines inasmuch as we are one people with a common destiny. Any statements that are likely to trigger violence of any sort should be eschewed.
Ghanaians are now wide awake regarding what is good for them. The various flag bearers should be prepared for the great showdown, because the masses will hold them to their words. Therefore, rather than giving vain promises, they should debate or talk about ideas and issues that will win the hearts of the electorate.
We need solutions to the low standards of living, the energy crisis, coupled with the huge electricity bills; we want to see improvement in education, health care delivery and access to the very basic necessities of life.
These are the issues we expect politicians to be preoccupied with. The electorate should do away with tribalism and vote on issues and for people who have national interest at heart. They should demonstrate that they have vision that hold good prospects for the economy.
It is at this time that the media is expected to exhibit high sense of maturity. For this reason, one agrees with the Ghana Journalists Association when it admonished its rank and file to be cautious, because this year is a crucial one. The media should not unnecessarily whip up tension. This is not the time to engage in mischief. Rather, it is the time to engage in balanced, objective, fair and analytical discussions of issues to enable the electorate make informed choices. The electronic media, which has a greater influence on people’s mindset should not allow their airwaves to be used as platforms for unscrupulous people to engage in politics of doom.
Also, we must all bear in mind that the nation comes first and foremost before anything else, and with this commitment, the sky should be our limit. Communities should assess the gains — whatever benefits and improvements have been brought to them. They should refuse to be lured by campaigns of vain promises and money giving.
Managing post-election disputes, especially those related to parliamentary results require the Judiciary to act swiftly. In the event of election disputes as witnessed in some constituencies during previous parliamentary elections, the cases should be handled with dispatch. The courts should not wait for the Legislature’s term to expire before disposing of such cases.
I am saying this against the background that some of such disputes relating to the parliamentary elections which linger on in our courts after the 2004 elections. Cases of such nature require special courts to be created to handle them for the sake of peace and transparency. For of what benefit and significance will it be to the winning party if a case is dealt with after the term of the Legislature has, for instance, elapsed.
The EC should remain independent and not be intimidated by any person or a group persons to do anything untoward. The EC must assess itself in terms of the logistics available to it and do what will serve the best interest of all Ghanaians and not the interest of any individual person or a group of persons. The warning should be sounded that the country belongs to all Ghanaians and not to any individual person, ethnic group, or political party. Perhaps, the National Commission on Civic Education (NCCE) should drum this home to all and sundry and also educate Ghanaians on the need for unity, since anything that will hatch division will eventually do us no good. NCCE should not unnecessarily be petrified into thinking that anything preposterous could happen and, therefore, advocate a change in the election time.
IT is a truism that this year’s general election is a test case for Ghana to showcase to the rest of the world that it has reached a no turning point in her quest to deepen and entrench her democracy.
The political topography is changing and maturing, and this must be sustained. Ghanaians must demonstrate this by successfully coming out of the December election unscathed. Indeed, Ghana is the island of peace and tranquility.
We need not give room for anything unruly to happen in order to lend credence to that accolade. The time to show that we are politically maturing is now, and this is a task which can only be accomplished only if we exhibit extreme tolerance, camaraderie, fortitude and accept divergent views or ideas to extricate the country from some of the unnecessary post-election crisis being experienced or suffered in other parts of the world, especially on the African continent. As the shining star of Africa, Ghana must indeed lead by example for others to emulate, so that her success story will serve as a laboratory for research into the woes that continue to plague the other turbulent democracies on the African continent.
Preparations are currently underway for the December elections after the major political parties have selected their flag bearers. The stage is now set for what should promise to be refreshing electioneering. Ghana expects nothing, but a clean campaign, devoid of rancour, inflammatory language and insults.
For Ghana to have a completely clean slate, everybody and all institutions in the country should play their roles towards the successful election that we yearn for. The politicians themselves, the media, the Judiciary, the Electoral Commission (EC), the electorate and, in fact, the youth on whose shoulders the future of this country rests. What is happening in other countries should be a reminder to us that nothing should be left to chance. That Ghanaians are a peaceful and loving people, and Ghana is a God-fearing country is a complacent self-congratulation which does not take us anywhere. If we do not take care, we may be taken by events. We should discard the assertion that the turbulence in other countries cannot occur in our country.
At least, we should be inspired by the fine things that are said about us and not think that Ghanaians fear bloodletting. Should we throw our dear and peaceful country into violence, there will be no safe haven anywhere in the sub-region for us. As the island that we are, we will be thrown into the simmering waters that surround us. Our country will be so debilitated to the extent that the women and children who form the majority and the base of our development and progress will suffer.
In the event of any disturbances, we should not forget that the rich and politicians will continue to live in affluence at plush areas and also send their relatives abroad. While that happens, they will continue to fuel the violence for the sake of their interests so that the poor continue kill themselves. So you see why we should not let them take us for granted?
Our political leaders cannot take the masses for a ride this time round and think that they will be supported after throwing the country into a mess. Their political campaigns should not be done on tribal lines inasmuch as we are one people with a common destiny. Any statements that are likely to trigger violence of any sort should be eschewed.
Ghanaians are now wide awake regarding what is good for them. The various flag bearers should be prepared for the great showdown, because the masses will hold them to their words. Therefore, rather than giving vain promises, they should debate or talk about ideas and issues that will win the hearts of the electorate.
We need solutions to the low standards of living, the energy crisis, coupled with the huge electricity bills; we want to see improvement in education, health care delivery and access to the very basic necessities of life.
These are the issues we expect politicians to be preoccupied with. The electorate should do away with tribalism and vote on issues and for people who have national interest at heart. They should demonstrate that they have vision that hold good prospects for the economy.
It is at this time that the media is expected to exhibit high sense of maturity. For this reason, one agrees with the Ghana Journalists Association when it admonished its rank and file to be cautious, because this year is a crucial one. The media should not unnecessarily whip up tension. This is not the time to engage in mischief. Rather, it is the time to engage in balanced, objective, fair and analytical discussions of issues to enable the electorate make informed choices. The electronic media, which has a greater influence on people’s mindset should not allow their airwaves to be used as platforms for unscrupulous people to engage in politics of doom.
Also, we must all bear in mind that the nation comes first and foremost before anything else, and with this commitment, the sky should be our limit. Communities should assess the gains — whatever benefits and improvements have been brought to them. They should refuse to be lured by campaigns of vain promises and money giving.
Managing post-election disputes, especially those related to parliamentary results require the Judiciary to act swiftly. In the event of election disputes as witnessed in some constituencies during previous parliamentary elections, the cases should be handled with dispatch. The courts should not wait for the Legislature’s term to expire before disposing of such cases.
I am saying this against the background that some of such disputes relating to the parliamentary elections which linger on in our courts after the 2004 elections. Cases of such nature require special courts to be created to handle them for the sake of peace and transparency. For of what benefit and significance will it be to the winning party if a case is dealt with after the term of the Legislature has, for instance, elapsed.
The EC should remain independent and not be intimidated by any person or a group persons to do anything untoward. The EC must assess itself in terms of the logistics available to it and do what will serve the best interest of all Ghanaians and not the interest of any individual person or a group of persons. The warning should be sounded that the country belongs to all Ghanaians and not to any individual person, ethnic group, or political party. Perhaps, the National Commission on Civic Education (NCCE) should drum this home to all and sundry and also educate Ghanaians on the need for unity, since anything that will hatch division will eventually do us no good. NCCE should not unnecessarily be petrified into thinking that anything preposterous could happen and, therefore, advocate a change in the election time.
COP DENIES BEING INCAPABLE IN THOMAS OSEI TRIAL
Story: Stephen Sah
General Constable Joseph Frimpong of the Airport Police Station, yesterday denied that he did not give sufficient notice to road users at the Opeibea intersection where President Kufuor’s car was involved in an accident.
He, however confirmed that at the time of the accident the traffic lights at the intersection were working.
The policeman who was testifying under cross-examination by Mr Kwame Boafo Akuffo, counsel for Thomas Osei, the man at the centre of President J.A. Kufuor’s car crash disagreed with the counsel that he was not capable of manning the intersection single-handedly.
He said that as soon as he heard the siren blurring, he raised his hands and stopped all vehicular movement at all directions but Osei ignored him and overtook a taxi cab and run into the President’s vehicle.
Osei now faces seven counts of use of narcotic drugs, dangerous driving, negligently causing harm, driving under the influence of alcohol, failing to give way to a Presidential convoy and failing to effect change of ownership of vehicle, to which he has pleaded not guilty.
Osei was discharged by the court on Thursday, December 20, 2007 after the prosecution had filed a nolle prosequi (unwilling to prosecute) but he was re-arrested when he stepped out of the court.
He was first arraigned before the Motor Court on November 16, 2007 and remanded.
Around 11.30 a.m. on November 14, 2007, Osei, who was driving a Mercedes Benz SE 500 saloon car in the inner lane along the Liberation Link from the direction of Aviance towards the 37 Military Hospital, drove into the rear side of the President’s vehicle, in spite of the fact that other motorists had been stopped to allow the President’s convoy to pass.
The driver of the President’s car and the driver of a VW saloon car were treated and discharged, while Osei was admitted for treatment.
The President escaped unhurt.
Investigations showed that Osei was driving under the influence of alcohol.
Constable Frimpong said after traffic had been brought to a halt other vehicles joined the queue of vehicles and that he turned to face the 37 Military Hospital direction of the road.
“It is not true that I did not give sufficient notice to the accused driver because after stopping all the vehicles from moving I turn my back for the Presidential convoy to face the opposite direction”, he said.
The witness agreed with the counsel that after arresting the accused person, he did not seek clearance from his superiors before he handed Osei to the President’s security men.
He further agreed that he had not been questioned about the incident but denied that the accused person demanded after his arrest why he alone had been arrested because there had been a driver before him.
Two other witnesses, namely Isaac Afoani, an employee of the Community Protection Unit and Reverend King Joe Osei Kufuor, the man whose VW Golf car was affected by the accident also testified in the case.
Afoani who said his first time of seeing a Presidential convoy was bemused by it and so he took advantage of being on duty at the Opeibea area to steal a glimpse of the President’s car.
According to him, he was stationed in the area on the day of the incident to drive away hawkers and while at post he heard a siren of the President’s convoy and a policeman in the middle of the road signalling vehicles to stop.
He said that he saw the dispatch riders come to pass and not quite long some vehicles followed but suddenly he saw the car of the accused person pull up at top speed overtaking a taxi cab in front of the car.
“I shouted hei, hei, hei and then the policeman standing in the middle of the road also raised his hands shouting stop, stop, stop but the accused did not stop and he almost hit the policeman who jumped aside”, the witness said.
He said that what he saw was that the car of the accused person hit the president’s car making it to hit an electricity pole before hitting a VW Golf.
He disagreed with the counsel that he was being used as a tool by the prosecution to testify in the case because it involved the President and reiterated that the accused person’s car overtook a taxi cab before hitting the car of the President.
Reverend Kufuor narrated his story about how the accident occurred but he had a hectic time during cross-examination when his credibility was brought to the fore.
Mr Akuffo who was privy to certain information about the witness stunned him and discredited his assertion that he was a man of God because the Reverend apparently had procured a passport under a false date of birth.
The pastor also could not answer favourable questions relating to how he procured his drivers’ licence, among other issues that were put to him.
General Constable Joseph Frimpong of the Airport Police Station, yesterday denied that he did not give sufficient notice to road users at the Opeibea intersection where President Kufuor’s car was involved in an accident.
He, however confirmed that at the time of the accident the traffic lights at the intersection were working.
The policeman who was testifying under cross-examination by Mr Kwame Boafo Akuffo, counsel for Thomas Osei, the man at the centre of President J.A. Kufuor’s car crash disagreed with the counsel that he was not capable of manning the intersection single-handedly.
He said that as soon as he heard the siren blurring, he raised his hands and stopped all vehicular movement at all directions but Osei ignored him and overtook a taxi cab and run into the President’s vehicle.
Osei now faces seven counts of use of narcotic drugs, dangerous driving, negligently causing harm, driving under the influence of alcohol, failing to give way to a Presidential convoy and failing to effect change of ownership of vehicle, to which he has pleaded not guilty.
Osei was discharged by the court on Thursday, December 20, 2007 after the prosecution had filed a nolle prosequi (unwilling to prosecute) but he was re-arrested when he stepped out of the court.
He was first arraigned before the Motor Court on November 16, 2007 and remanded.
Around 11.30 a.m. on November 14, 2007, Osei, who was driving a Mercedes Benz SE 500 saloon car in the inner lane along the Liberation Link from the direction of Aviance towards the 37 Military Hospital, drove into the rear side of the President’s vehicle, in spite of the fact that other motorists had been stopped to allow the President’s convoy to pass.
The driver of the President’s car and the driver of a VW saloon car were treated and discharged, while Osei was admitted for treatment.
The President escaped unhurt.
Investigations showed that Osei was driving under the influence of alcohol.
Constable Frimpong said after traffic had been brought to a halt other vehicles joined the queue of vehicles and that he turned to face the 37 Military Hospital direction of the road.
“It is not true that I did not give sufficient notice to the accused driver because after stopping all the vehicles from moving I turn my back for the Presidential convoy to face the opposite direction”, he said.
The witness agreed with the counsel that after arresting the accused person, he did not seek clearance from his superiors before he handed Osei to the President’s security men.
He further agreed that he had not been questioned about the incident but denied that the accused person demanded after his arrest why he alone had been arrested because there had been a driver before him.
Two other witnesses, namely Isaac Afoani, an employee of the Community Protection Unit and Reverend King Joe Osei Kufuor, the man whose VW Golf car was affected by the accident also testified in the case.
Afoani who said his first time of seeing a Presidential convoy was bemused by it and so he took advantage of being on duty at the Opeibea area to steal a glimpse of the President’s car.
According to him, he was stationed in the area on the day of the incident to drive away hawkers and while at post he heard a siren of the President’s convoy and a policeman in the middle of the road signalling vehicles to stop.
He said that he saw the dispatch riders come to pass and not quite long some vehicles followed but suddenly he saw the car of the accused person pull up at top speed overtaking a taxi cab in front of the car.
“I shouted hei, hei, hei and then the policeman standing in the middle of the road also raised his hands shouting stop, stop, stop but the accused did not stop and he almost hit the policeman who jumped aside”, the witness said.
He said that what he saw was that the car of the accused person hit the president’s car making it to hit an electricity pole before hitting a VW Golf.
He disagreed with the counsel that he was being used as a tool by the prosecution to testify in the case because it involved the President and reiterated that the accused person’s car overtook a taxi cab before hitting the car of the President.
Reverend Kufuor narrated his story about how the accident occurred but he had a hectic time during cross-examination when his credibility was brought to the fore.
Mr Akuffo who was privy to certain information about the witness stunned him and discredited his assertion that he was a man of God because the Reverend apparently had procured a passport under a false date of birth.
The pastor also could not answer favourable questions relating to how he procured his drivers’ licence, among other issues that were put to him.
ASSESSMENT OF KUFUOR'S TERM OF OFFICE
Story: Stephen Sah & Kofi Yeboah
EXACTLY a year from today, President John Agyekum Kufuor will hand-over the presidency to a successor yet to be determined after an eight-year tenure in office.
It will be the day on which the dream of one man, be he Professor J.E.A. Mills or Nana Akufo-Addo, Dr Paa Kwesi Ndoum or Dr Edward Mahama or, indeed any of the other presidential aspirants will become a reality of the time.
Ahead of that occasion, an appraisal of the stewardship of President Kufuor made by some Ghanaian think tanks, selected by the Daily Graphic, shows that President Kufuor’s performance in the various aspects of governance, has been quite commendable.
Overall, the President scored between 50 and 70 per cent in various sectors of assessment, earning high marks in the areas EXACTLY a year from today, President John Agyekum Kufuor will hand-over the presidency to a successor yet to be determined after an eight-year tenure in office.
It will be the day on which the dream of one man, be he Professor J.E.A. Mills or Nana Akufo-Addo, Dr Paa Kwesi Ndoum or Dr Edward Mahama or, indeed any of the other presidential aspirants will become a reality of the time.
Ahead of that occasion, an appraisal of the stewardship of President Kufuor made by some Ghanaian think tanks, selected by the Daily Graphic, shows that President Kufuor’s performance in the various aspects of governance, has been quite commendable.
Overall, the President scored between 50 and 70 per cent in various sectors of assessment, earning high marks in the areas of the economy, security and freedom of the economy, security and freedom of expression, recording average marks in upholding human rights and accessing justice while recording lower marks in respect of fighting corruption.
The appraisers of the President’s stewardship were the President of the Association of Ghana Industries (AGI), Mr Tony Oteng-Gyasi, the Co-ordinator of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), Africa, Nana Oye Lithur, a Research Fellow at the Institute of Democratic Governance (IDEG), Mr Kwesi Jonah, the Dean of the Faculty of Social Studies of the University of Ghana, Prof Atsu Ayee and the Director of Research at the Kofi Annan Peacekeeping Training Centre, Dr Emmanuel Kwesi Enning and Mrs Jean Mensa, the Administrator of the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA).
Mrs Mensa congratulated the President for the successes chalked by his administration over the past seven years but pointed out that some challenges in his final year in office and for the future government.
She said it was refreshing that the present administration has won power and kept if for the past seven years.
Mrs Mensa explained that the New Patriotic Party (NPP) was the first non-military institution to win power through the ballot box and kept it for seven years adding that “all previous attempts were successful at winning power but failed to hold on to it. She said this was significant in our history bearing in mind that Flt Lt J.J Rawlings won power and was able to keep it for eight years but he came from a military background.
Mrs Mensa also commended the government for maintaining macro-economic stability for seven years during which inflation has declined from the high of 40s to the low 10s. “We have also seen interest rates drop from the high 40s to the low 10s on the seven year period noting that “while the IEA thinks the NPP government has done well, the challenge though is how to maintain the current macro stability and keep inflation and interest rates under leash”.
She said it was important for the government to disentangle ourselves from running a colonial economy which mainly benefits the major multi-nationals in Ghana to an economy whose primary focus would be the improvement of the life of the average Ghanaian and also to an economy where “we are no more exporters of raw materials and importers of finished products but to an economy where we are the producers of finished goods for exports”.
Mrs Mensa also stressed the need for the Kufour administration to use the final year to decentralise the Ghanaian economy and our political structure.
“As of now, district chief executives still do not feel they owe any responsibility to the people. They owe their responsibilities to the Presidency in Accra and the challenge is how to decentralise so that district chief executives would owe their responsibility to the residents of the various districts”.
Mr Jonah on his part described the national economy under President Kufuor as sustainable and the country as a preferred destination for foreign direct investment (FDI).
He said although Ghana was tackling indices of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), such as poverty and access to school for children of school-going age, it was still lagging behind in respect of health indices, such as infant and maternal mortality, and stressed the need to reconsider those areas to activate growth.
According to Mr Jonah, presently, the economy was reported to be growing at an average rate of five per cent and although there have been increases in external exports with attractive prices on the world market and economic growth must increase.
“The inflow of investment has been quite good. The exploration of oil and the emergence of major mining companies in the country is a clear indication of external confidence in the national economy”, he noted.
He added that the inflow of about $500 million from the Millennium Challange Account (MCA) and the floating of Ghana bonds on the London Stock Exchange, coupled with good governance, were all indicators that Ghana was a safe place for investment.
Mr Jonah, who is also a senior lecturer at the Political Science Department of the University of Ghana, said the re-denomination exercise embarked upon by the Bank of Ghana (BoG) was a major plus for the government because it boosted business in an economy where transactions were largely cash-based.
On the political front, Mr Jonah said Ghana had been an island of peace and tranquillity in the sub-region because it had upheld the tenets of the constitution, particularly with respect to fundamental civil liberties.
That, he noted, had allowed an atmosphere that allows all political parties the freedom to criticise the government and contribute to the development process without any interference from the Executive.
However, Mr Jonah expressed concern about the Representation of the People’s Amendment Law (ROPAL), saying that it was a privilege and not a right for Ghanaians living abroad to exercise their franchise.
Regarding the international political arena, he said the holding of the African Union (AU) Summit in Accra in 2006 and the appointment of President Kufuor as the AU chairman had been a good omen for Africa, especially the sub-region.
Assessing the President’s performance in industry, the Mr Oteng-Gyasi said the President's performance was above average.
He noted that President Kufuor and the government had had to contend with very difficult economic environment but they worked to stabilise the economy, adding that manufacturing was now growing between four and five per cent.
Mr Oteng-Gyasi also praised the government for showing a willingness to listen to players in industry and implementing some of their suggestions, but he pointed out that there was more room for improvement.
“We would have loved to see a clear industrial policy for the country but that has not been the case,” he indicated, adding that the nation needed to invest in the production of agro processing machinery and other items that could be manufactured locally.
The AGI President said it was wrong for people to think that the President’s term in office was over, pointing out that “one year of policy decision-making can change a lot of things”.
He said without any pressure of running for re-election, the President had an added advantage of implementing good policies, expressing the hope that he would end his tenure on a very high note.
In his assessment, Prof Ayee described the achievement of the Kufuor regime as marginal.
On the economic front, he said the positive thing that happened to the country was the stability of the cedi because prior to taking office, the depreciation of the cedi was phenomenal as a result of which the currency was marginalised.
Prof Ayee said the drop in inflation was superficial because people still felt prices had shot up, especially after the re-denomination of the cedi, but pointed out that the government could not be faulted much because of the increase in petroleum prices on the world market.
He said not much had been done to tackle unemployment in spite of the President’s special initiative on employment, indicating that the number of unemployed youth was high and had resulted in the upsurge in armed robbery.
Prof Ayee said although standards of living had not improved, the government should be commended for the introduction of the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS), the capitation grant and the school feeding programme.
He said the President’s zero tolerance for corruption was a public relations gimmick, which he never tackled and that would be a large electoral issue this year.
“The approach to corruption has been selective, especially the trial of Mallam Yusif Isa and others, have been a cosmetic show”, he said and claimed that a lot of people had been cited for corruption but left off the hook.
Prof Ayee commended the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) for investigating former Minister of Transportation, Dr Richard Anane, although the judiciary interpreted it differently, adding that the perception of corruption now was much higher than it used to be in the National Democratic Congress (NDC) regime.
He said the human rights record of the NPP government was better than that of the NDC, especially with the repeal of the criminal libel law, describing it as “a feather in the cap of the government although we cannot have a total human right record because of a few abrasions here and there like what happened to Alhaji Mobilla”.
According to him, there had been an upsurge in ethnic violence because ethnic politics had reared its head and there was the need to do away with that through public education spearheaded by the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE) and political parties.
In respect of human rights, the ardent human rights campaigner, Nana Oye Lithur, gave the President five out of 10 marks based on an assessment of his performance on the Directive Principles of State Policy and human rights provisions enshrined in the Constitution were concerned.
On the positive side, she admitted that there had been an improvement in freedom of expression and press freedom, pointing out that the improvement was because “he himself has displayed a certain level of tolerance that has facilitated a progressive development, promotion and fulfilling of press freedom and freedom of expression”.
Nana Oye Lithur said there had also been tremendous improvement in political, social and economic rights as depicted by the enhanced credibility of elections in the country and initiatives, such as the school feeding programme and the capitation grant for basic schools, all geared towards achieving the goals of the free compulsory universal basic education (F-CUBE) as required by the constitution.
On the flip side, Nana Oye Lithur said corruption was a major indictment on the President’s stewardship, particularly so when he had launched his administration on a “zero tolerance for corruption” campaign.
“All said and done, that is one big indictment on his tenure. People were full of hope because he vowed to fight corruption. But I haven’t seen that he has addressed corruption effectively. It seems like he has shielded his government from allegations of corruption”, she observed.
Nana Oye Lithur also expressed disappointment in the manner the President had handled the extra judicial killing of 44 Ghanaians in The Gambia, three year after the incident took place.
She said in the first instance, it was out of order for the President to have attended the African Union (AU) Summit in The Gambia three years ago after the incident; secondly, the government had taken too long a time to investigate and take a firm decision on the issue.
Nana Oye Lithur mentioned forced evictions and demolition exercises in various parts of the country without recourse to due procedures, as well as rampant police brutalities and the deplorable conditions of mining communities and prisoners, as some of the minuses on the President’s human rights record.
“From where I sit, I saw him more as protecting the investor’s interest over and above the interest of the communities where these mining activities were going on. From the top of my head, I cannot recall any concrete statement that he’s made directed at people in mining areas... but we all saw him opening or inaugurating a mine or receiving heads of mining companies at the Castle”, she pointed out.
Nana Oye Lithur mentioned inadequate housing, lack of access to toilets, water, electricity and other social amenities as some of the areas the President failed to deliver satisfactorily.
With regard to security, Dr Enning said the government had done creditably, giving it six-and-half out of 10 marks.
According to him, there had been general improvement in civil-military relations and the physical improvement in the security services.
Dr Enning said the security had also become more subservient to civilian rule unlike in the past but added that the process of improving security started during the NDC regime but “the Kufuor administration has reduced the rot in the system”.
On the international level, he said President had made immense contribution towards restoring peace and stability to countries like Cote d’Ivoire, Togo, Sierra Leone and Liberia
Dr Enning attributed the success story on the security front to the various roles played by the Ghana Armed Forces, Parliament, CHRAJ and other democratic institutions.
He said one of the lowest point on security track record of President Kufuor’s administration was the Dagbon conflict.
Dr Enning said there were still challenges concerning issues of recruitment into the security services, adding that the increasing activities of drug lords and youth unemployment had the tendency to undermine national security and stressed the need to address them.
It is against such pluses and minuses that Ghanaians will go to the polls again in December this year to choose a successor to President Kufuor.
December is still a long way yet but with the major political parties having held their congresses and elected their presidential candidates, the lines are clearly drawn for an exciting campaign.
The largest opposition group, the National Democratic Congress set the tone with the election of former Vice President, John Evans Atta-Mills as its flagbearer. That was followed by the People’s National Convention (PNC) with the election of Dr. Edward Mahama.
The Convention People’s Party (CPP) followed with the election of Dr. Paa Kwesi Ndoum and then the New Patriotic Party (NPP) held its congress to elect Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo as its flagbearer.
With a few oth er minority parties yet to elect their flag bearers, attention on the next phase of the process will be on the choice of running-mates by the various presidential candidates.
EXACTLY a year from today, President John Agyekum Kufuor will hand-over the presidency to a successor yet to be determined after an eight-year tenure in office.
It will be the day on which the dream of one man, be he Professor J.E.A. Mills or Nana Akufo-Addo, Dr Paa Kwesi Ndoum or Dr Edward Mahama or, indeed any of the other presidential aspirants will become a reality of the time.
Ahead of that occasion, an appraisal of the stewardship of President Kufuor made by some Ghanaian think tanks, selected by the Daily Graphic, shows that President Kufuor’s performance in the various aspects of governance, has been quite commendable.
Overall, the President scored between 50 and 70 per cent in various sectors of assessment, earning high marks in the areas EXACTLY a year from today, President John Agyekum Kufuor will hand-over the presidency to a successor yet to be determined after an eight-year tenure in office.
It will be the day on which the dream of one man, be he Professor J.E.A. Mills or Nana Akufo-Addo, Dr Paa Kwesi Ndoum or Dr Edward Mahama or, indeed any of the other presidential aspirants will become a reality of the time.
Ahead of that occasion, an appraisal of the stewardship of President Kufuor made by some Ghanaian think tanks, selected by the Daily Graphic, shows that President Kufuor’s performance in the various aspects of governance, has been quite commendable.
Overall, the President scored between 50 and 70 per cent in various sectors of assessment, earning high marks in the areas of the economy, security and freedom of the economy, security and freedom of expression, recording average marks in upholding human rights and accessing justice while recording lower marks in respect of fighting corruption.
The appraisers of the President’s stewardship were the President of the Association of Ghana Industries (AGI), Mr Tony Oteng-Gyasi, the Co-ordinator of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), Africa, Nana Oye Lithur, a Research Fellow at the Institute of Democratic Governance (IDEG), Mr Kwesi Jonah, the Dean of the Faculty of Social Studies of the University of Ghana, Prof Atsu Ayee and the Director of Research at the Kofi Annan Peacekeeping Training Centre, Dr Emmanuel Kwesi Enning and Mrs Jean Mensa, the Administrator of the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA).
Mrs Mensa congratulated the President for the successes chalked by his administration over the past seven years but pointed out that some challenges in his final year in office and for the future government.
She said it was refreshing that the present administration has won power and kept if for the past seven years.
Mrs Mensa explained that the New Patriotic Party (NPP) was the first non-military institution to win power through the ballot box and kept it for seven years adding that “all previous attempts were successful at winning power but failed to hold on to it. She said this was significant in our history bearing in mind that Flt Lt J.J Rawlings won power and was able to keep it for eight years but he came from a military background.
Mrs Mensa also commended the government for maintaining macro-economic stability for seven years during which inflation has declined from the high of 40s to the low 10s. “We have also seen interest rates drop from the high 40s to the low 10s on the seven year period noting that “while the IEA thinks the NPP government has done well, the challenge though is how to maintain the current macro stability and keep inflation and interest rates under leash”.
She said it was important for the government to disentangle ourselves from running a colonial economy which mainly benefits the major multi-nationals in Ghana to an economy whose primary focus would be the improvement of the life of the average Ghanaian and also to an economy where “we are no more exporters of raw materials and importers of finished products but to an economy where we are the producers of finished goods for exports”.
Mrs Mensa also stressed the need for the Kufour administration to use the final year to decentralise the Ghanaian economy and our political structure.
“As of now, district chief executives still do not feel they owe any responsibility to the people. They owe their responsibilities to the Presidency in Accra and the challenge is how to decentralise so that district chief executives would owe their responsibility to the residents of the various districts”.
Mr Jonah on his part described the national economy under President Kufuor as sustainable and the country as a preferred destination for foreign direct investment (FDI).
He said although Ghana was tackling indices of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), such as poverty and access to school for children of school-going age, it was still lagging behind in respect of health indices, such as infant and maternal mortality, and stressed the need to reconsider those areas to activate growth.
According to Mr Jonah, presently, the economy was reported to be growing at an average rate of five per cent and although there have been increases in external exports with attractive prices on the world market and economic growth must increase.
“The inflow of investment has been quite good. The exploration of oil and the emergence of major mining companies in the country is a clear indication of external confidence in the national economy”, he noted.
He added that the inflow of about $500 million from the Millennium Challange Account (MCA) and the floating of Ghana bonds on the London Stock Exchange, coupled with good governance, were all indicators that Ghana was a safe place for investment.
Mr Jonah, who is also a senior lecturer at the Political Science Department of the University of Ghana, said the re-denomination exercise embarked upon by the Bank of Ghana (BoG) was a major plus for the government because it boosted business in an economy where transactions were largely cash-based.
On the political front, Mr Jonah said Ghana had been an island of peace and tranquillity in the sub-region because it had upheld the tenets of the constitution, particularly with respect to fundamental civil liberties.
That, he noted, had allowed an atmosphere that allows all political parties the freedom to criticise the government and contribute to the development process without any interference from the Executive.
However, Mr Jonah expressed concern about the Representation of the People’s Amendment Law (ROPAL), saying that it was a privilege and not a right for Ghanaians living abroad to exercise their franchise.
Regarding the international political arena, he said the holding of the African Union (AU) Summit in Accra in 2006 and the appointment of President Kufuor as the AU chairman had been a good omen for Africa, especially the sub-region.
Assessing the President’s performance in industry, the Mr Oteng-Gyasi said the President's performance was above average.
He noted that President Kufuor and the government had had to contend with very difficult economic environment but they worked to stabilise the economy, adding that manufacturing was now growing between four and five per cent.
Mr Oteng-Gyasi also praised the government for showing a willingness to listen to players in industry and implementing some of their suggestions, but he pointed out that there was more room for improvement.
“We would have loved to see a clear industrial policy for the country but that has not been the case,” he indicated, adding that the nation needed to invest in the production of agro processing machinery and other items that could be manufactured locally.
The AGI President said it was wrong for people to think that the President’s term in office was over, pointing out that “one year of policy decision-making can change a lot of things”.
He said without any pressure of running for re-election, the President had an added advantage of implementing good policies, expressing the hope that he would end his tenure on a very high note.
In his assessment, Prof Ayee described the achievement of the Kufuor regime as marginal.
On the economic front, he said the positive thing that happened to the country was the stability of the cedi because prior to taking office, the depreciation of the cedi was phenomenal as a result of which the currency was marginalised.
Prof Ayee said the drop in inflation was superficial because people still felt prices had shot up, especially after the re-denomination of the cedi, but pointed out that the government could not be faulted much because of the increase in petroleum prices on the world market.
He said not much had been done to tackle unemployment in spite of the President’s special initiative on employment, indicating that the number of unemployed youth was high and had resulted in the upsurge in armed robbery.
Prof Ayee said although standards of living had not improved, the government should be commended for the introduction of the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS), the capitation grant and the school feeding programme.
He said the President’s zero tolerance for corruption was a public relations gimmick, which he never tackled and that would be a large electoral issue this year.
“The approach to corruption has been selective, especially the trial of Mallam Yusif Isa and others, have been a cosmetic show”, he said and claimed that a lot of people had been cited for corruption but left off the hook.
Prof Ayee commended the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) for investigating former Minister of Transportation, Dr Richard Anane, although the judiciary interpreted it differently, adding that the perception of corruption now was much higher than it used to be in the National Democratic Congress (NDC) regime.
He said the human rights record of the NPP government was better than that of the NDC, especially with the repeal of the criminal libel law, describing it as “a feather in the cap of the government although we cannot have a total human right record because of a few abrasions here and there like what happened to Alhaji Mobilla”.
According to him, there had been an upsurge in ethnic violence because ethnic politics had reared its head and there was the need to do away with that through public education spearheaded by the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE) and political parties.
In respect of human rights, the ardent human rights campaigner, Nana Oye Lithur, gave the President five out of 10 marks based on an assessment of his performance on the Directive Principles of State Policy and human rights provisions enshrined in the Constitution were concerned.
On the positive side, she admitted that there had been an improvement in freedom of expression and press freedom, pointing out that the improvement was because “he himself has displayed a certain level of tolerance that has facilitated a progressive development, promotion and fulfilling of press freedom and freedom of expression”.
Nana Oye Lithur said there had also been tremendous improvement in political, social and economic rights as depicted by the enhanced credibility of elections in the country and initiatives, such as the school feeding programme and the capitation grant for basic schools, all geared towards achieving the goals of the free compulsory universal basic education (F-CUBE) as required by the constitution.
On the flip side, Nana Oye Lithur said corruption was a major indictment on the President’s stewardship, particularly so when he had launched his administration on a “zero tolerance for corruption” campaign.
“All said and done, that is one big indictment on his tenure. People were full of hope because he vowed to fight corruption. But I haven’t seen that he has addressed corruption effectively. It seems like he has shielded his government from allegations of corruption”, she observed.
Nana Oye Lithur also expressed disappointment in the manner the President had handled the extra judicial killing of 44 Ghanaians in The Gambia, three year after the incident took place.
She said in the first instance, it was out of order for the President to have attended the African Union (AU) Summit in The Gambia three years ago after the incident; secondly, the government had taken too long a time to investigate and take a firm decision on the issue.
Nana Oye Lithur mentioned forced evictions and demolition exercises in various parts of the country without recourse to due procedures, as well as rampant police brutalities and the deplorable conditions of mining communities and prisoners, as some of the minuses on the President’s human rights record.
“From where I sit, I saw him more as protecting the investor’s interest over and above the interest of the communities where these mining activities were going on. From the top of my head, I cannot recall any concrete statement that he’s made directed at people in mining areas... but we all saw him opening or inaugurating a mine or receiving heads of mining companies at the Castle”, she pointed out.
Nana Oye Lithur mentioned inadequate housing, lack of access to toilets, water, electricity and other social amenities as some of the areas the President failed to deliver satisfactorily.
With regard to security, Dr Enning said the government had done creditably, giving it six-and-half out of 10 marks.
According to him, there had been general improvement in civil-military relations and the physical improvement in the security services.
Dr Enning said the security had also become more subservient to civilian rule unlike in the past but added that the process of improving security started during the NDC regime but “the Kufuor administration has reduced the rot in the system”.
On the international level, he said President had made immense contribution towards restoring peace and stability to countries like Cote d’Ivoire, Togo, Sierra Leone and Liberia
Dr Enning attributed the success story on the security front to the various roles played by the Ghana Armed Forces, Parliament, CHRAJ and other democratic institutions.
He said one of the lowest point on security track record of President Kufuor’s administration was the Dagbon conflict.
Dr Enning said there were still challenges concerning issues of recruitment into the security services, adding that the increasing activities of drug lords and youth unemployment had the tendency to undermine national security and stressed the need to address them.
It is against such pluses and minuses that Ghanaians will go to the polls again in December this year to choose a successor to President Kufuor.
December is still a long way yet but with the major political parties having held their congresses and elected their presidential candidates, the lines are clearly drawn for an exciting campaign.
The largest opposition group, the National Democratic Congress set the tone with the election of former Vice President, John Evans Atta-Mills as its flagbearer. That was followed by the People’s National Convention (PNC) with the election of Dr. Edward Mahama.
The Convention People’s Party (CPP) followed with the election of Dr. Paa Kwesi Ndoum and then the New Patriotic Party (NPP) held its congress to elect Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo as its flagbearer.
With a few oth er minority parties yet to elect their flag bearers, attention on the next phase of the process will be on the choice of running-mates by the various presidential candidates.
NEW CPP EXECUTIVES PLEDGE TO WIN POWER
New CPP executives
pledge to win power
Story: Stephen Sah
THE new Central Executive Committee of the Convention People’s Party (CPP) under the chairmanship of Mr Ladi Nylander was sworn in yesterday with a central focus of capturing political power come December 2008.
The dynamism and unity of the party was clearly manifested at the ceremony which saw all the presidential aspirants except Mr George Aggudey in attendance.
The aspirants took turns to ask the rank and file of the party to lend their support to Dr Paa Kwesi Nduom, the flag bearer to enable the party to win the December elections.
Dr Kwaku Osafo, Mr Bright Akwetey, Dr Fred Akuffo and Prof Akosa were unanimous in their loyalty to the party and pledge to lend an unflinching support to the flag bearer so that the party would win the election to ensure the economic emancipation of Ghanaians.
They were cheered by an enthusiastic party supporter who reverberated the good old times of the party claiming that the party was reawaken.
Dr Nduom declared that during his campaign tour of the country the clarion call of the people was that the time was ripe for the CPP to come to power, however, that was not going to be on a silver platter and there was the need for members to play their roles effectively.
According to him, the party currently bore no semblance to that which was taken to previous elections because all the party stalwarts were solidly united to do the battle come December.
“All over the country the youth are joining the party to reclaim a lost heritage which they can find in the CPP”, he said and added that the party under him would not discriminate against Ghanaians but rather give advantage to all to bring out the best in them to push the development agenda of the country forward.
Making reference to the Asian giants, which according to him have become the envy of all, their success did not come by chance but it was because the people were supported by the state and that the CPP would do the same for local entrepreneurs and companies.
He said that the party would encourage the private sector and create jobs with accompanying living wages for workers as well as support farmers.
Dr Nduom said, for instance that the Suame Magazine in Kumasi would receive massive financial support and market to boost their production while the meat factory in the north would be made operational after 100 days of the CPP in office.
He declared that he was not in the presidential race to support any political party saying that “ I am in this race so that come January 7, 2009 when President Kufuor is leaving, he hands over power to me”.
Mr Nylander said the new CPP was not going to bask in the success of the past. He said that the task was to reinvigorate the party and gave the assurance that the new executive would do their part to strengthen the party and make it attractive.
He said the party was different because it was concerned with the welfare of the people while it would also make Ghanaians the centre of economic achievement.
pledge to win power
Story: Stephen Sah
THE new Central Executive Committee of the Convention People’s Party (CPP) under the chairmanship of Mr Ladi Nylander was sworn in yesterday with a central focus of capturing political power come December 2008.
The dynamism and unity of the party was clearly manifested at the ceremony which saw all the presidential aspirants except Mr George Aggudey in attendance.
The aspirants took turns to ask the rank and file of the party to lend their support to Dr Paa Kwesi Nduom, the flag bearer to enable the party to win the December elections.
Dr Kwaku Osafo, Mr Bright Akwetey, Dr Fred Akuffo and Prof Akosa were unanimous in their loyalty to the party and pledge to lend an unflinching support to the flag bearer so that the party would win the election to ensure the economic emancipation of Ghanaians.
They were cheered by an enthusiastic party supporter who reverberated the good old times of the party claiming that the party was reawaken.
Dr Nduom declared that during his campaign tour of the country the clarion call of the people was that the time was ripe for the CPP to come to power, however, that was not going to be on a silver platter and there was the need for members to play their roles effectively.
According to him, the party currently bore no semblance to that which was taken to previous elections because all the party stalwarts were solidly united to do the battle come December.
“All over the country the youth are joining the party to reclaim a lost heritage which they can find in the CPP”, he said and added that the party under him would not discriminate against Ghanaians but rather give advantage to all to bring out the best in them to push the development agenda of the country forward.
Making reference to the Asian giants, which according to him have become the envy of all, their success did not come by chance but it was because the people were supported by the state and that the CPP would do the same for local entrepreneurs and companies.
He said that the party would encourage the private sector and create jobs with accompanying living wages for workers as well as support farmers.
Dr Nduom said, for instance that the Suame Magazine in Kumasi would receive massive financial support and market to boost their production while the meat factory in the north would be made operational after 100 days of the CPP in office.
He declared that he was not in the presidential race to support any political party saying that “ I am in this race so that come January 7, 2009 when President Kufuor is leaving, he hands over power to me”.
Mr Nylander said the new CPP was not going to bask in the success of the past. He said that the task was to reinvigorate the party and gave the assurance that the new executive would do their part to strengthen the party and make it attractive.
He said the party was different because it was concerned with the welfare of the people while it would also make Ghanaians the centre of economic achievement.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Story: Stephen Sah
POLICEMAN TESTIFIES IN OSEI'S CASE
THE prosecution today (Thursday) preferred an additional charge of failing to effect change of ownership of vehicle against Thomas Osei, the man at the centre of President J.A. Kufuor’s car crash.
Following that the old charge sheet which contained six charges was substituted with a new one to reflect the additional charge while the plea of the accused was taken again.
Similarly, the particulars relating to the use of narcotics was also amended to indicate that the accused used cocaine because traces of the narcotic were found in his urine.
Osei now faces seven counts of use of narcotic drugs, dangerous driving, negligently causing harm, driving under the influence of alcohol, failing to give way to a Presidential convoy and failing to effect change of ownership of vehicle, to which he has pleaded not guilty.
Osei was discharged by the court on Thursday, December 20, 2007 after the prosecution had filed a nolle prosequi (unwilling to prosecute) but he was re-arrested when he stepped out of the court.
He was first arraigned before the Motor Court on November 16, 2007 and remanded.
The facts of the case are that around 11.30 a.m. on November 14, 2007, Osei, who was driving a Mercedes Benz SE 500 saloon car in the inner lane along the Liberation Link from the direction of Aviance towards the 37 Military Hospital, drove into the rear side of the President’s vehicle, in spite of the fact that other motorists had been stopped to allow the President’s convoy to pass.
The driver of the President’s car and the driver of the VW saloon car were treated and discharged, while Osei was admitted for treatment.
The President escaped unhurt.
Investigations showed that Osei was driving under the influence of alcohol.
The first prosecution witness, General Constable Joseph Frimpong of the Airport Police Station who was on duty at the Opeibea intersection on the day of the incident narrated to the court how the accident occurred.
According to him, he was at post and at about 11.30 a.m. he received a call from President Kufuor’s security that the President was about to pass to his office and, therefore, he should be on the alert.
Constable Frimpong said when he heard about the siren of the Presidential convoy, he stopped all vehicles but suddenly, he heard the sound of a moving vehicle which happened to be the vehicle of the accused person.
He said the vehicle of the accused overtook other vehicles to hit the vehicle on which the President was and after the accident he went to the accuser person’s vehicle to hold him before the President’s security detail took him away.
The witness said the accused person realising what he had done put his hands on his head while the President’s security brought out their guns.
He said that he called a few people around to push the vehicle of the accused person which was in the middle ofd the road and went for a stone and marked the point of impact before moving the vehicle.
Constable Frimpong said that he then called the office to bring a towing vehicle to tow the vehicle of the Presisdent and that of a VW Golf which was affected by the accident.
He said during cross-examination that when he heard about the moving vehicle the car of the accused person was almost near him and that he would not know whether the traffic lights were showing green since he had stopped all vehicles from moving.
The witness disagreed with counsel that the accused after the incident exclaimed “Who is this crazy driver?” while he was also not a ware that after the incident security at the point where the accident occurred had been beefed up with soldiers and policemen.
He agreed with counsel that sirens were blown by other vehicles and blowing of it was not automatic that the President was passing by.
POLICEMAN TESTIFIES IN OSEI'S CASE
THE prosecution today (Thursday) preferred an additional charge of failing to effect change of ownership of vehicle against Thomas Osei, the man at the centre of President J.A. Kufuor’s car crash.
Following that the old charge sheet which contained six charges was substituted with a new one to reflect the additional charge while the plea of the accused was taken again.
Similarly, the particulars relating to the use of narcotics was also amended to indicate that the accused used cocaine because traces of the narcotic were found in his urine.
Osei now faces seven counts of use of narcotic drugs, dangerous driving, negligently causing harm, driving under the influence of alcohol, failing to give way to a Presidential convoy and failing to effect change of ownership of vehicle, to which he has pleaded not guilty.
Osei was discharged by the court on Thursday, December 20, 2007 after the prosecution had filed a nolle prosequi (unwilling to prosecute) but he was re-arrested when he stepped out of the court.
He was first arraigned before the Motor Court on November 16, 2007 and remanded.
The facts of the case are that around 11.30 a.m. on November 14, 2007, Osei, who was driving a Mercedes Benz SE 500 saloon car in the inner lane along the Liberation Link from the direction of Aviance towards the 37 Military Hospital, drove into the rear side of the President’s vehicle, in spite of the fact that other motorists had been stopped to allow the President’s convoy to pass.
The driver of the President’s car and the driver of the VW saloon car were treated and discharged, while Osei was admitted for treatment.
The President escaped unhurt.
Investigations showed that Osei was driving under the influence of alcohol.
The first prosecution witness, General Constable Joseph Frimpong of the Airport Police Station who was on duty at the Opeibea intersection on the day of the incident narrated to the court how the accident occurred.
According to him, he was at post and at about 11.30 a.m. he received a call from President Kufuor’s security that the President was about to pass to his office and, therefore, he should be on the alert.
Constable Frimpong said when he heard about the siren of the Presidential convoy, he stopped all vehicles but suddenly, he heard the sound of a moving vehicle which happened to be the vehicle of the accused person.
He said the vehicle of the accused overtook other vehicles to hit the vehicle on which the President was and after the accident he went to the accuser person’s vehicle to hold him before the President’s security detail took him away.
The witness said the accused person realising what he had done put his hands on his head while the President’s security brought out their guns.
He said that he called a few people around to push the vehicle of the accused person which was in the middle ofd the road and went for a stone and marked the point of impact before moving the vehicle.
Constable Frimpong said that he then called the office to bring a towing vehicle to tow the vehicle of the Presisdent and that of a VW Golf which was affected by the accident.
He said during cross-examination that when he heard about the moving vehicle the car of the accused person was almost near him and that he would not know whether the traffic lights were showing green since he had stopped all vehicles from moving.
The witness disagreed with counsel that the accused after the incident exclaimed “Who is this crazy driver?” while he was also not a ware that after the incident security at the point where the accident occurred had been beefed up with soldiers and policemen.
He agreed with counsel that sirens were blown by other vehicles and blowing of it was not automatic that the President was passing by.
Story: Stephen Sah
BAIL CONTRACTORS INFILTRATE JUDICIARY
A syndicate, whose members include some foreign nationals, has infiltrated the ranks of the country’s judiciary as bail contractors, using unclaimed documents in the custody of the courts and fake ones to secure bail for accused persons.
Daily Graphic investigations indicate that the bail contractors, whose practices are widespread in Accra, operate mainly at the 28th February Road courts but they occasionally extend their operations to other parts of the country.
They operate under trees near the Complaints Unit at the Cocoa Affairs Court where they do brisk business.
Sources say the contractors are in league with prosecutors, investigators and lawyers who approach them for their services.
The bail contractors allegedly charge their customers between GH¢500 and GH¢6,000 depending on the bail term, and give them documents such as indentures and titles to property in plush residential areas in Accra.
According to a source, the contractors are usually given unclaimed documents which had been used to secure bail for offenders by some court officials, while the contractors themselves also secure fake ones from other sources, such as the Land Title Registry, among others.
The contractors, who are known by court clerks and other officials, when approached with bail problems, usually produce fake documents to cover property at such plush areas as the Airport Residential Area, East Legon, North Ridge, Cantonments, among other areas.
Sources close to the courts allege that police investigators do not visit a property; once a document is provided, the “proper” thing is thought to have been done.
Currently, the sources say that the syndicate is made up of an indigenous group, as well as a foreign group whose members are mainly from Mali, Niger and other Sahelian countries.
This reporter approached three well-known contractors separately under a tree at the Cocoa Affairs Court with a bail problem for a relative.
When the contractors were told that the bail amount was GH¢10,000, all three of them charged between GH¢1,000 and GH¢2,500.
A lawyer who declined to be named said he was aware of “professional” bailers who charged people and guaranteed with their documents.
When told about how the group secured the documents, the lawyer replied, “It is possible that they get access to some of the documents in the custody of the courts because a client of mine had experienced something nasty in the past.”
According to the lawyer, his client’s documents could not be traced when he needed them to secure bail in a different court.
He stated that there were some property owners who swore affidavits and handed their documents to such contractors to work with and make money.
However, he said, anytime offenders absconded, such contractors faced jail terms not exceeding six months.
Another lawyer described the bail business as booming, adding that a story about it in the newspapers would greatly affect it.
He, however, admitted that the practice could be responsible for the loss or disappearance of some dockets in the courts.
BAIL CONTRACTORS INFILTRATE JUDICIARY
A syndicate, whose members include some foreign nationals, has infiltrated the ranks of the country’s judiciary as bail contractors, using unclaimed documents in the custody of the courts and fake ones to secure bail for accused persons.
Daily Graphic investigations indicate that the bail contractors, whose practices are widespread in Accra, operate mainly at the 28th February Road courts but they occasionally extend their operations to other parts of the country.
They operate under trees near the Complaints Unit at the Cocoa Affairs Court where they do brisk business.
Sources say the contractors are in league with prosecutors, investigators and lawyers who approach them for their services.
The bail contractors allegedly charge their customers between GH¢500 and GH¢6,000 depending on the bail term, and give them documents such as indentures and titles to property in plush residential areas in Accra.
According to a source, the contractors are usually given unclaimed documents which had been used to secure bail for offenders by some court officials, while the contractors themselves also secure fake ones from other sources, such as the Land Title Registry, among others.
The contractors, who are known by court clerks and other officials, when approached with bail problems, usually produce fake documents to cover property at such plush areas as the Airport Residential Area, East Legon, North Ridge, Cantonments, among other areas.
Sources close to the courts allege that police investigators do not visit a property; once a document is provided, the “proper” thing is thought to have been done.
Currently, the sources say that the syndicate is made up of an indigenous group, as well as a foreign group whose members are mainly from Mali, Niger and other Sahelian countries.
This reporter approached three well-known contractors separately under a tree at the Cocoa Affairs Court with a bail problem for a relative.
When the contractors were told that the bail amount was GH¢10,000, all three of them charged between GH¢1,000 and GH¢2,500.
A lawyer who declined to be named said he was aware of “professional” bailers who charged people and guaranteed with their documents.
When told about how the group secured the documents, the lawyer replied, “It is possible that they get access to some of the documents in the custody of the courts because a client of mine had experienced something nasty in the past.”
According to the lawyer, his client’s documents could not be traced when he needed them to secure bail in a different court.
He stated that there were some property owners who swore affidavits and handed their documents to such contractors to work with and make money.
However, he said, anytime offenders absconded, such contractors faced jail terms not exceeding six months.
Another lawyer described the bail business as booming, adding that a story about it in the newspapers would greatly affect it.
He, however, admitted that the practice could be responsible for the loss or disappearance of some dockets in the courts.
Story: Stephen Sah
GIMPA RECTOR CASE UP IN COURT
THE Accra Fast Track High Court today began the hearing of the case in which Mr Egbert Isaac Faibille Jnr is seeking an order to restrain Dr Stephen Adei from holding himself out as Rector and a professor of the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA).
Mr Faibille wants the court to order that Dr Adei was not a professor either at GIMPA or any other institution and he should be restrained from holding himself out as such.
He further wants the court to order GIMPA to advertise the position of Rector of GIMPA since it was vacant because, according to him, when the tenure of office of Dr Adei expired on October 1, 2004, he had had not been appointed as Rector.
Led in evidence by his counsel, Mr Faibille described as a very big fraud being perpetuated on students and the people of Ghana if Dr Adei was allowed to use the title professor and also allowed to be at post in such a public institution.
Mr Faibille who is a lawyer and publisher of the Ghanaian Observer newspaper, has sued Dr Adei, the Governing Council of GIMPA and GIMPA as an entity.
According to him, Dr Adei was appointed by the then Court of Governors of GIMPA as Director-General of GIMPA in October 1, 1999, for a five-year term, however, on the expiration of his tenure in October 2004, Dr Adei was still at post.
He said when Dr Adei’s term of office expired, Dr Adei verbally told the GIMPA governing council to renew his appointment after which he was appointed as the acting Rector from January 1, 2005.
The plaintiff said that beyond that no letter or communication had been sent to Dr Adei confirming his appointment in the acting capacity.
Dr Adei, he said, was not duly appointed for the period that he had been in office from October 1, 2005 to date adding that GIMPA was a public institution and that the anomaly must be properly handled.
“The conduct of the defendants has been most irregular and improper against the background that GIMPA is a cherished public tertiary institution”, he stated.
Mr Faibille noted that the first time that he realised Dr Adei was holding himself out as a professor was in July 5, 2002 when Daily Graphic published about his appointment by a Zimbabwe-based institution which was affiliated to the University of Zimbabwe.
He said a research that he conducted on GIMPA indicated that Dr Adei was a Professor in Leadership but the GIMPA statute states that the position of a full professor could not be earned unless the applicant first had to apply for an associate professorship position and go through a vetting procedure.
Mr Faibille said Dr Adei had never been vetted by the GIMPA promotion committee even if he had been appointed a professor by any institution as required and that an assertion by the GIMPA governing body that it was aware of the appointment was not correct.
He questioned how the body could rely on only a newspaper report to base its assertion since the report could be false saying that “the African Leadership and Management Academy based in Zimbabwe has not appointed Dr Adei as a professor and neither has it conferred professorial whether full, associate or adjunct on him”.
“Records at GIMPA show that Dr Adei has not been vetted for the professorial position he claims. He must be restrained because now that the issue has come out that the governing body inherited minutes of a meeting in which Dr Adei’s appointment was mentioned then it means that the procedure has not been followed.
“The fact that the council is aware of Dr Adei’ professorial position is even dangerous because it is coming from a newspaper publication, especially when it can be false”, he said.
Mr Faibille further described as more dangerous when the GIMPA Governing Council said it was taking steps to confer a full professor on Dr Adei since from the statute of GIMPA it was clear that the first position was an Associate Professor after which one was eligible to apply for a full professorship.
He said Dr Adei was not an Associate Professor at GIMPA and he did not meet the conditions to apply for a full professor since he was an adjunct professor of the Zimbabwe-based institute.
Hearing continues tomorrow (Thursday).
GIMPA RECTOR CASE UP IN COURT
THE Accra Fast Track High Court today began the hearing of the case in which Mr Egbert Isaac Faibille Jnr is seeking an order to restrain Dr Stephen Adei from holding himself out as Rector and a professor of the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA).
Mr Faibille wants the court to order that Dr Adei was not a professor either at GIMPA or any other institution and he should be restrained from holding himself out as such.
He further wants the court to order GIMPA to advertise the position of Rector of GIMPA since it was vacant because, according to him, when the tenure of office of Dr Adei expired on October 1, 2004, he had had not been appointed as Rector.
Led in evidence by his counsel, Mr Faibille described as a very big fraud being perpetuated on students and the people of Ghana if Dr Adei was allowed to use the title professor and also allowed to be at post in such a public institution.
Mr Faibille who is a lawyer and publisher of the Ghanaian Observer newspaper, has sued Dr Adei, the Governing Council of GIMPA and GIMPA as an entity.
According to him, Dr Adei was appointed by the then Court of Governors of GIMPA as Director-General of GIMPA in October 1, 1999, for a five-year term, however, on the expiration of his tenure in October 2004, Dr Adei was still at post.
He said when Dr Adei’s term of office expired, Dr Adei verbally told the GIMPA governing council to renew his appointment after which he was appointed as the acting Rector from January 1, 2005.
The plaintiff said that beyond that no letter or communication had been sent to Dr Adei confirming his appointment in the acting capacity.
Dr Adei, he said, was not duly appointed for the period that he had been in office from October 1, 2005 to date adding that GIMPA was a public institution and that the anomaly must be properly handled.
“The conduct of the defendants has been most irregular and improper against the background that GIMPA is a cherished public tertiary institution”, he stated.
Mr Faibille noted that the first time that he realised Dr Adei was holding himself out as a professor was in July 5, 2002 when Daily Graphic published about his appointment by a Zimbabwe-based institution which was affiliated to the University of Zimbabwe.
He said a research that he conducted on GIMPA indicated that Dr Adei was a Professor in Leadership but the GIMPA statute states that the position of a full professor could not be earned unless the applicant first had to apply for an associate professorship position and go through a vetting procedure.
Mr Faibille said Dr Adei had never been vetted by the GIMPA promotion committee even if he had been appointed a professor by any institution as required and that an assertion by the GIMPA governing body that it was aware of the appointment was not correct.
He questioned how the body could rely on only a newspaper report to base its assertion since the report could be false saying that “the African Leadership and Management Academy based in Zimbabwe has not appointed Dr Adei as a professor and neither has it conferred professorial whether full, associate or adjunct on him”.
“Records at GIMPA show that Dr Adei has not been vetted for the professorial position he claims. He must be restrained because now that the issue has come out that the governing body inherited minutes of a meeting in which Dr Adei’s appointment was mentioned then it means that the procedure has not been followed.
“The fact that the council is aware of Dr Adei’ professorial position is even dangerous because it is coming from a newspaper publication, especially when it can be false”, he said.
Mr Faibille further described as more dangerous when the GIMPA Governing Council said it was taking steps to confer a full professor on Dr Adei since from the statute of GIMPA it was clear that the first position was an Associate Professor after which one was eligible to apply for a full professorship.
He said Dr Adei was not an Associate Professor at GIMPA and he did not meet the conditions to apply for a full professor since he was an adjunct professor of the Zimbabwe-based institute.
Hearing continues tomorrow (Thursday).
NINE EMPLOYEES OF KINAPHARMA IN COURT
NINE employees of Kinapharma Company Ltd, an Accra-based pharmaceutical company, were yesterday arraigned at the Accra Circuit Court for allegedly stealing a stock of chemical products valued at GH¢228,271.40 and belonging to the company.
Six of the accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charges and they were admitted to various bail terms, ranging between GH¢2,000 and GH¢170,000.
A bench warrant was issued for the arrest of three other accomplices who were not in court, while the case was adjourned to February 13, 2008.
The accused persons were admitted to bail in the following terms: Emmanuel Sarfo, accounts officer — GH¢2,000; Collins Asiedu, Regional Manager — GH¢700; Nelson Akwamuwor, supervisor — GH¢43,000; Solomon Bortey, driver — GH¢40,000; Alexander Oduro, sales representative — GH¢170,000, and Samuel Logbah, also a driver — GH¢3,000.
Those at large are Abraham Gyamfi, warehouse supervisor; Bernard Arthur and Henry Boamah, both drivers.
Prosecuting, Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) George Abavelim told the court that all the accused persons were employees of Kinapharma, which is involved in the production and sale of pharmaceutical products.
He said in October last year, the company’s accounting system was audited and the report indicated that a stock of products valued at GH¢228,271.04 had been requested for, approved and collected from the warehouse for sale but it was unaccounted for by the accused persons.
According to the prosecutor, it was detected that a lot of transactions had been made in the form of stock transfers into a dormant account known as Central Medical Stores (CMS).
He said from the report, between April and September last year, Sarfo stole GH¢192,316.34 by means of stock transfer and zero invoicing of sales, while Asiedu, within the same period, also stole GH¢67,486.75 through the approval of stock requisitions which were never accounted for.
ASP Abavelim said Akwamuwor also stole GH¢41,495.68 through the non approval of stock requisitions submitted by sales teams and which were never accounted for, while Bortey, as the driver in charge of sales in Accra, collected products worth GH¢39,474.95 but failed to account for them.
Oduro, he said, also collected stock valued at GH¢161,654.47 but failed to account for it, while Logbah collected stock of chemical products worth GH¢2,509.43 but failed to account for it.
He said a report was made to the police, after which the accused persons were arrested, while the rest went into hiding.
Six of the accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charges and they were admitted to various bail terms, ranging between GH¢2,000 and GH¢170,000.
A bench warrant was issued for the arrest of three other accomplices who were not in court, while the case was adjourned to February 13, 2008.
The accused persons were admitted to bail in the following terms: Emmanuel Sarfo, accounts officer — GH¢2,000; Collins Asiedu, Regional Manager — GH¢700; Nelson Akwamuwor, supervisor — GH¢43,000; Solomon Bortey, driver — GH¢40,000; Alexander Oduro, sales representative — GH¢170,000, and Samuel Logbah, also a driver — GH¢3,000.
Those at large are Abraham Gyamfi, warehouse supervisor; Bernard Arthur and Henry Boamah, both drivers.
Prosecuting, Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) George Abavelim told the court that all the accused persons were employees of Kinapharma, which is involved in the production and sale of pharmaceutical products.
He said in October last year, the company’s accounting system was audited and the report indicated that a stock of products valued at GH¢228,271.04 had been requested for, approved and collected from the warehouse for sale but it was unaccounted for by the accused persons.
According to the prosecutor, it was detected that a lot of transactions had been made in the form of stock transfers into a dormant account known as Central Medical Stores (CMS).
He said from the report, between April and September last year, Sarfo stole GH¢192,316.34 by means of stock transfer and zero invoicing of sales, while Asiedu, within the same period, also stole GH¢67,486.75 through the approval of stock requisitions which were never accounted for.
ASP Abavelim said Akwamuwor also stole GH¢41,495.68 through the non approval of stock requisitions submitted by sales teams and which were never accounted for, while Bortey, as the driver in charge of sales in Accra, collected products worth GH¢39,474.95 but failed to account for them.
Oduro, he said, also collected stock valued at GH¢161,654.47 but failed to account for it, while Logbah collected stock of chemical products worth GH¢2,509.43 but failed to account for it.
He said a report was made to the police, after which the accused persons were arrested, while the rest went into hiding.
Story: Stephen Sah
OSEI HAD TRACES OF COCAINE IN URINE
IT has now been established that traces of cocaine were found in the urine sample of Thomas Osei, the man at the centre of President J.A. Kufuor’s car crash.
Counsel for the accused person, Mr Kwame Boafo Akuffo, disclosed this at the Accra Fast Track High Court yesterday in his renewed application for bail which was refused.
Osei is facing six counts of use of narcotic drugs, dangerous driving, negligently causing harm, driving under the influence of alcohol and failing to give way to a Presidential convoy.
According to the court, the narcotic charge still stood, irrespective of its quantity, and as far as the court was concerned it had the apprehension that when granted bail, the accused person would not appear to stand trial.
Consequently, it adjourned the case to January 17, 2008 for hearing.
Mr Akuffo had argued that at the last sitting the court refused to grant bail to his client because the prosecution was still investigating the matter and said now that the prosecution was ready for the hearing, the bail application ought to be reconsidered.
Counsel said granting Osei bail would be in line with provisions in the Constitution which stipulated that all offences were bailable.
According to counsel, the minute nature of traces of cocaine in his client’s urine sample enjoined the court to exercise its responsibility to admit Osei to bail.
“The manner in which the sample was taken was not proper. We have our reservations about how the urine sample was taken but we reserve our case and ask for bail,” he said.
However, Ms Gertrude Aikins, the acting Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), responded that while traffic offences were bailable, offences regarding narcotics were not and for that reason Osei could not be admitted to bail.
Dismissing the application for bail, the court, presided over by Mr Justice E.K. Ayebi, said counsel failed to address the court on matters that related to bail but rather raised substantive issues for the trial.
He said the accused was not only facing traffic charges but narcotic charges as well.
Osei was discharged by the court on Thursday, December 20, 2007 after the prosecution had filed a nolle prosequi (unwilling to prosecute) but he was re-arrested when he stepped out of the court.
The court was to give its ruling on an application for bail made by counsel for the accused person at the last sitting but that had to be abandoned because of the latest development.
Osei was first arraigned before the Motor Court on November 16, 2007 and remanded following a request by Chief Inspector Dora Seiwaah, then the prosecutor, to the court to remand him for investigations to be completed.
The facts of the case are that around 11.30 a.m. on November 14, 2007, Osei, who was driving a Mercedes Benz SE 500 saloon car in the inner lane along the Liberation Link from the direction of Aviance towards the 37 Military Hospital, drove into the rear side of the President’s vehicle, in spite of the fact that other motorists had been stopped to allow the President’s convoy to pass.
The prosecutor said the impact of the crash forced the President’s vehicle to turn around, hit a light pole and, in the process, fell on its right side and landed on a VW Golf saloon car
All the vehicles involved in the accident got damaged, while the drivers sustained various degrees of injury and were rushed to the 37 Military Hospital for treatment.
The driver of the President’s car and the driver of the VW saloon car were treated and discharged, while Osei was admitted for treatment.
The President escaped unhurt.
Investigations showed that Osei was driving under the influence of alcohol.
OSEI HAD TRACES OF COCAINE IN URINE
IT has now been established that traces of cocaine were found in the urine sample of Thomas Osei, the man at the centre of President J.A. Kufuor’s car crash.
Counsel for the accused person, Mr Kwame Boafo Akuffo, disclosed this at the Accra Fast Track High Court yesterday in his renewed application for bail which was refused.
Osei is facing six counts of use of narcotic drugs, dangerous driving, negligently causing harm, driving under the influence of alcohol and failing to give way to a Presidential convoy.
According to the court, the narcotic charge still stood, irrespective of its quantity, and as far as the court was concerned it had the apprehension that when granted bail, the accused person would not appear to stand trial.
Consequently, it adjourned the case to January 17, 2008 for hearing.
Mr Akuffo had argued that at the last sitting the court refused to grant bail to his client because the prosecution was still investigating the matter and said now that the prosecution was ready for the hearing, the bail application ought to be reconsidered.
Counsel said granting Osei bail would be in line with provisions in the Constitution which stipulated that all offences were bailable.
According to counsel, the minute nature of traces of cocaine in his client’s urine sample enjoined the court to exercise its responsibility to admit Osei to bail.
“The manner in which the sample was taken was not proper. We have our reservations about how the urine sample was taken but we reserve our case and ask for bail,” he said.
However, Ms Gertrude Aikins, the acting Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), responded that while traffic offences were bailable, offences regarding narcotics were not and for that reason Osei could not be admitted to bail.
Dismissing the application for bail, the court, presided over by Mr Justice E.K. Ayebi, said counsel failed to address the court on matters that related to bail but rather raised substantive issues for the trial.
He said the accused was not only facing traffic charges but narcotic charges as well.
Osei was discharged by the court on Thursday, December 20, 2007 after the prosecution had filed a nolle prosequi (unwilling to prosecute) but he was re-arrested when he stepped out of the court.
The court was to give its ruling on an application for bail made by counsel for the accused person at the last sitting but that had to be abandoned because of the latest development.
Osei was first arraigned before the Motor Court on November 16, 2007 and remanded following a request by Chief Inspector Dora Seiwaah, then the prosecutor, to the court to remand him for investigations to be completed.
The facts of the case are that around 11.30 a.m. on November 14, 2007, Osei, who was driving a Mercedes Benz SE 500 saloon car in the inner lane along the Liberation Link from the direction of Aviance towards the 37 Military Hospital, drove into the rear side of the President’s vehicle, in spite of the fact that other motorists had been stopped to allow the President’s convoy to pass.
The prosecutor said the impact of the crash forced the President’s vehicle to turn around, hit a light pole and, in the process, fell on its right side and landed on a VW Golf saloon car
All the vehicles involved in the accident got damaged, while the drivers sustained various degrees of injury and were rushed to the 37 Military Hospital for treatment.
The driver of the President’s car and the driver of the VW saloon car were treated and discharged, while Osei was admitted for treatment.
The President escaped unhurt.
Investigations showed that Osei was driving under the influence of alcohol.
Story: Stephen Sah
BRITISH DENIES OFFENCE
THOMAS Alan Tichler, the 57-year-old Briton accused of indecently assaulting a three-year-old girl denied the offence yesterday and said the girl had been coached to frame him up.
“I deny any form of harm, indecent assault and inappropriate behaviour with the victim. There is no bone in any part of my body that will allow me to do anything as horrendous as what has been described. I swear this not only on oath but on the head of my children,” he said when he opened his defence at the Accra circuit court
Tichler, who is alleged to have inserted his fingers into the victim’s vagina, has pleaded not guilty to two counts of causing harm and indecent assault.
He has been refused bail.
According to Tichler, he came to Ghana under the auspices of the Volunteer Service Overseas (VSO) and was attached to the Micro Finance and Small Loans Centre established under the Office of the President to disburse small loans without collateral to the productive poor.
He said his responsibility was to assist in refining the internal policies and procedures of the project and he was excited by it because he believed in processes that involved self-help for poverty mediation.
He said before coming to Ghana, he was taken through a series of interview processes, such as the cultural sensibilities of Ghanaians, health and safety briefings, as well as a check on his criminal record.
The accused described the incident relating him to the offence as a terrible blow and a damage to his reputation. “However, I do understand that any parent faced with his or her precious little girl bleeding in her private part will be extremely alarmed and concerned. As a parent, I will have a similar concern. I understand the need to find the truth but it should be the truth,” he stated.
Stating how he came to be associated with the victim’s father and subsequently visited his house, Tichler explained that he struck an acquaintance with the girl’s father, who happened to be the Human Resource Manager of the project on which he worked.
He said after a series of conversations, he agreed to visit the man and his family, after he had done a background check of the family, especially on the ages of the children.
Asked by Mr Ellis Owusu-Fordjuor, his counsel, as to how he managed to get to the house of the victim’s father, Tichler replied that having armed himself with the ages of the children, he bought some postcards and serviette and met the man at a church rendezvous where he was picked home, after some shopping by the man.
Tichler said when he got to the house, the man decided to occupy himself with some construction work he was doing, while he (Tichler) also engaged the children in games in the lounge.
At that time, he said he learnt that the victim’s mother had gone to the market but she came back not quite long after he got there, while the man left to purchase items needed for the work.
He said while he played with the children, it got to a time when his alleged victim had little attention and, therefore, he carried her on his shoulders and went round the house playing with her.
“After about five minutes she started to become heavy and I suggested it was time she came down, but she crossed her legs around my neck and did not want to come down,” he said of the girl.
He said the girl’s mother also pleaded that she came down, but she refused, but eventually he managed to bring her down on the sofa, where he subsequently sat to watch television, while the girl joined her other siblings to also watch a movie.
The accused person said the girl intermittently returned to bounce herself on the sofa until she informed him that she wanted to urinate, at which point he took her to the mother.
He said when the girl left the room, he heard commotion in the adjacent room and after that the girl came to report that her mother had cried.
He said he noticed that the girl was not wearing an underwear so he sent her to her mother and decided to relax for some time before taking a stroll where he found some workmen in the house.
Tichler said when he stepped outside the house, he saw his male host arrive in his car in a frenzy and started assaulting him and accusing him of having defiled his daughter.
He said the man punched him to the ground and brought him into the house where he brought a pair of underwear to him, amidst accusations of defilement, adding that he (the accused) was stunned and overwhelmed.
According to him, he was taken to the Legon Police Station and then to a hospital where he was stripped naked to examine whether he had had sex with the girl. But the doctor could not find any evidence to support the charge of defilement.
He said when he requested the doctor to take debris from his fingernails for forensic examination, the police said he had washed his hands, but the doctor replied that it would not have made any difference.
BRITISH DENIES OFFENCE
THOMAS Alan Tichler, the 57-year-old Briton accused of indecently assaulting a three-year-old girl denied the offence yesterday and said the girl had been coached to frame him up.
“I deny any form of harm, indecent assault and inappropriate behaviour with the victim. There is no bone in any part of my body that will allow me to do anything as horrendous as what has been described. I swear this not only on oath but on the head of my children,” he said when he opened his defence at the Accra circuit court
Tichler, who is alleged to have inserted his fingers into the victim’s vagina, has pleaded not guilty to two counts of causing harm and indecent assault.
He has been refused bail.
According to Tichler, he came to Ghana under the auspices of the Volunteer Service Overseas (VSO) and was attached to the Micro Finance and Small Loans Centre established under the Office of the President to disburse small loans without collateral to the productive poor.
He said his responsibility was to assist in refining the internal policies and procedures of the project and he was excited by it because he believed in processes that involved self-help for poverty mediation.
He said before coming to Ghana, he was taken through a series of interview processes, such as the cultural sensibilities of Ghanaians, health and safety briefings, as well as a check on his criminal record.
The accused described the incident relating him to the offence as a terrible blow and a damage to his reputation. “However, I do understand that any parent faced with his or her precious little girl bleeding in her private part will be extremely alarmed and concerned. As a parent, I will have a similar concern. I understand the need to find the truth but it should be the truth,” he stated.
Stating how he came to be associated with the victim’s father and subsequently visited his house, Tichler explained that he struck an acquaintance with the girl’s father, who happened to be the Human Resource Manager of the project on which he worked.
He said after a series of conversations, he agreed to visit the man and his family, after he had done a background check of the family, especially on the ages of the children.
Asked by Mr Ellis Owusu-Fordjuor, his counsel, as to how he managed to get to the house of the victim’s father, Tichler replied that having armed himself with the ages of the children, he bought some postcards and serviette and met the man at a church rendezvous where he was picked home, after some shopping by the man.
Tichler said when he got to the house, the man decided to occupy himself with some construction work he was doing, while he (Tichler) also engaged the children in games in the lounge.
At that time, he said he learnt that the victim’s mother had gone to the market but she came back not quite long after he got there, while the man left to purchase items needed for the work.
He said while he played with the children, it got to a time when his alleged victim had little attention and, therefore, he carried her on his shoulders and went round the house playing with her.
“After about five minutes she started to become heavy and I suggested it was time she came down, but she crossed her legs around my neck and did not want to come down,” he said of the girl.
He said the girl’s mother also pleaded that she came down, but she refused, but eventually he managed to bring her down on the sofa, where he subsequently sat to watch television, while the girl joined her other siblings to also watch a movie.
The accused person said the girl intermittently returned to bounce herself on the sofa until she informed him that she wanted to urinate, at which point he took her to the mother.
He said when the girl left the room, he heard commotion in the adjacent room and after that the girl came to report that her mother had cried.
He said he noticed that the girl was not wearing an underwear so he sent her to her mother and decided to relax for some time before taking a stroll where he found some workmen in the house.
Tichler said when he stepped outside the house, he saw his male host arrive in his car in a frenzy and started assaulting him and accusing him of having defiled his daughter.
He said the man punched him to the ground and brought him into the house where he brought a pair of underwear to him, amidst accusations of defilement, adding that he (the accused) was stunned and overwhelmed.
According to him, he was taken to the Legon Police Station and then to a hospital where he was stripped naked to examine whether he had had sex with the girl. But the doctor could not find any evidence to support the charge of defilement.
He said when he requested the doctor to take debris from his fingernails for forensic examination, the police said he had washed his hands, but the doctor replied that it would not have made any difference.
Story: Stephen Sah
BRITISH PAEDOPHILE OPENS DEFENCE
THE 57-year-old Briton accused of indecently assaulting a three-year-old girl, attributed an inconsistency in statements he made to the police to a severe assault by the victim’s father.
“I was shocked and suffered concussion, a blurred vision and was confused by the assault upon me”, Thomas Alan Tichler, the accused person said of his state of mind at the time of making his first statement to the police after the incident.
He was answering questions on Wednesday under cross-examination from Ms Babara Sackey, a State Attorney, as to whether he still relied on statements that he made to the police.
The prosecutor had put it to Tichler that in his first statement to the police he claimed to have rinsed his hands after he had visited the toilet, while in subsequent ones he stated in the negative.
Prosecutor: So you want this court to believe that it was shock that made you not to write the truth in the first statement?
Accused: It is not that I did not write the truth. I made an error in the way I recalled the incident and I can assure you that it is an extremely frightening feeling to be thrown in jail following an assault at false accusation.
Prosecutor: Why did you not state that you made a mistake in your later statement?
Accused: It is because I have been advised in my caution statement that I am able to correct earlier statements and you will see that I have done so in subsequent statements.
Tichler, who is alleged to have inserted his fingers into the victim’s vagina, has pleaded not guilty to two counts of causing harm and indecent assault.
He has been refused bail.
He also said that on the particular weekend that the alleged incident happened, his other volunteer colleagues from the Volunteer Overseas Service (VSO) were going to watch a rugby match between England and Argentina, which he would have preferred to watch but in the interest of his relationship with his host, he abandoned the idea.
Tichler agreed with the prosecutor that after visiting the toilet, he did not wash his hands and according to him, there was no facility for him to wash his hands.
When the prosecutor suggested to him that in spite of his inability to wash his hands after visiting the toilet, he ate crackers and drank minerals in the residence of his host, Tichler replied that he felt very uncomfortable without having been able to freshen up and also embarrassed to ask for things not offered to him.
The accused did not agree with the prosecutor that he went to the kitchen to ask for water from the girl’s mother after he had inserted his fingers into the girl’s vagina.
“ There came a point towards the end of the meeting when I became aware that the girl’s mother was fetching water to wash the children’s pants and I took that opportunity to ask if I could also wash my hands and as to whether soap was available,” he said.
BRITISH PAEDOPHILE OPENS DEFENCE
THE 57-year-old Briton accused of indecently assaulting a three-year-old girl, attributed an inconsistency in statements he made to the police to a severe assault by the victim’s father.
“I was shocked and suffered concussion, a blurred vision and was confused by the assault upon me”, Thomas Alan Tichler, the accused person said of his state of mind at the time of making his first statement to the police after the incident.
He was answering questions on Wednesday under cross-examination from Ms Babara Sackey, a State Attorney, as to whether he still relied on statements that he made to the police.
The prosecutor had put it to Tichler that in his first statement to the police he claimed to have rinsed his hands after he had visited the toilet, while in subsequent ones he stated in the negative.
Prosecutor: So you want this court to believe that it was shock that made you not to write the truth in the first statement?
Accused: It is not that I did not write the truth. I made an error in the way I recalled the incident and I can assure you that it is an extremely frightening feeling to be thrown in jail following an assault at false accusation.
Prosecutor: Why did you not state that you made a mistake in your later statement?
Accused: It is because I have been advised in my caution statement that I am able to correct earlier statements and you will see that I have done so in subsequent statements.
Tichler, who is alleged to have inserted his fingers into the victim’s vagina, has pleaded not guilty to two counts of causing harm and indecent assault.
He has been refused bail.
He also said that on the particular weekend that the alleged incident happened, his other volunteer colleagues from the Volunteer Overseas Service (VSO) were going to watch a rugby match between England and Argentina, which he would have preferred to watch but in the interest of his relationship with his host, he abandoned the idea.
Tichler agreed with the prosecutor that after visiting the toilet, he did not wash his hands and according to him, there was no facility for him to wash his hands.
When the prosecutor suggested to him that in spite of his inability to wash his hands after visiting the toilet, he ate crackers and drank minerals in the residence of his host, Tichler replied that he felt very uncomfortable without having been able to freshen up and also embarrassed to ask for things not offered to him.
The accused did not agree with the prosecutor that he went to the kitchen to ask for water from the girl’s mother after he had inserted his fingers into the girl’s vagina.
“ There came a point towards the end of the meeting when I became aware that the girl’s mother was fetching water to wash the children’s pants and I took that opportunity to ask if I could also wash my hands and as to whether soap was available,” he said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)