Former Deputy Attorney-General and Member of Parliament for Bolgatanga East, Dr Dominic Akuritinga Ayine, has expressed grave displeasure concerning the Attorney-General Godfred Dame, for the best way and method he went about making use of for the expeditious listening to of the injunction utility by Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor in opposition to the consideration of the brand new ministers of President Akufo-Addo.
Dr. Ayine defined that, when the A-G applies for an abridgment of time in a case filed on the court docket, it’s paramount to serve discover to the lawyer for the opposite get together with a view to forestall any type of surprises.
According to the discovered lawyer and legislator, the lawyer for the applicant for the injunction was not knowledgeable on this explicit case.
“If you apply for a speedy hearing of the case you ought to serve the lawyer for the other party, that was not what was done in this particular case.
He said to journalists in Accra on Wednesday, March 27, “It is unethical to ambush the lawyer for the other party.”
In an earlier assertion, the Attorney-General, Mr Godfred Dame had mentioned that he utilized for a speedy listening to of Dafeamekpor’s injunction utility in opposition to the consideration of the ministerial nominees.
Mr. Godfred Dame defined that the Court Act and the Constitution allow a celebration to a case to use for expeditious listening to of the case therefore he doesn’t perceive the criticism in opposition to the Supreme Court for listening to this matter rapidly.
The Attorney-General’s feedback come on the heels of the backlashes by the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) in opposition to Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonorr, within the scheduling of political instances within the Supreme Court. The NDC accused her of being biased in opposition to them.
The get together’s concern was with reference to the itemizing of the case filed by Mr Dafeamekpor, for listening to, forward of the case of Richard Dela Sky v. the Parliament of Ghana and the Attorney-General.
According to a press release issued by the NDC on Wednesday, March 27, 2024, it was intriguing that “Richard Dela Sky filed his writ of summons in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2024, on the 5th of March 2024. This was almost two (2) clear weeks before Hon. Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor filed his writ of summons on 18th March, 2024 challenging the constitutionality of the latest ministerial nominations by the President.”
Speaking to Journalists in Accra after the Supreme Court dismissed Dafeamekpor’s utility, A-G Godfred Dame mentioned, “the duty to fix the date for the hearing rests with the registry of the Supreme Court and I do not understand where this business of people actually scrutinizing when applications are fixed for hearing or why this case has not been fixed for hearing, came from.
“Back in the day, if you file an application in the Supreme Court of Ghana it takes you even three months for you to get a date for a hearing. It is only after a party has made an application for an expeditious determination of the process that the matter will come up for hearing. Even the record show that in this particular case, I specifically applied for an expeditious determination of the matter so it is not the Supreme Court of Ghana picking and choosing which location should hear and not to hear.
“My first application for an expedited hearing of a matter in the Supreme Court, I did it way back in 2006 and I did another one in 2013 when we were in opposition. So it is always the prerogative of the Supreme Court registry to fix applications for hearing and if the date for the hearing has not been fixed or it is too far it is incumbent on the party to apply for the CJ in accordance with the court act and constitution for an expedited hearing.”
He additional described the injunction utility by Dafeamekpor in opposition to the consideration of the ministerial nominees, as frivolous and an abuse of the court docket course of after stating that it was an utility was an try and frustrate the work of the federal government.
Asked why it seems he takes a eager curiosity in solely issues that favor the federal government and never submitting for an expedited listening to within the utility in opposition to anti-gay invoice, Mr. Dame mentioned “we have filed a relevant affidavit in opposition in that matter, so I think all these comments are unwanted and indeed are baseless. We actually filed our opposition to the affidavit in answer to the Richard Sky matter before we filed the affidavit in answer today to this one.”
“It is most instructive that parliament itself was opposed to this application for interlocutory injunction by Dafeamekpor and I find it very interesting because the same Speaker of Parliament who earlier on adjourned proceedings in my view wrongly, on account of the pendency of this application then later on somersaulted and came to the supreme court and opposed the application and that is a point of interest to me. I think it shows clearly that the application clearly was frivolous and it ought not to be any manipulation of what went on in court, even parliament itself was opposed to the application.”
He additional added, “It is most unfortunate that persons who file processes before the court and then fail to take an interest in it. Indeed even when the same application for interlocutory injunction is pending has not been determined, a day before they proceed to go and file another application for interlocutory injunction, there cannot be a greater demonstration of a desire to abuse the court process than this. Clearly, it shows an attempt to frustrate the republic from pursuing its business and all. That is why it is necessary that as lawyers for the Republic, we take a keen interest in what happens and we make sure that such things are dealt with so that the state business can proceed.”
On Wednesday, March 27 the Supreme Court dismissed an injunction utility filed by Dafeamekpor in opposition to Parliament’s approval of ministerial nominees by President Akufo-Addo.
By a unanimous resolution, the apex Court mentioned the injunction utility is frivolous and an abuse of the court docket course of. Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor had filed an injunction restraining Parliament from vetting and approving new ministers in addition to reshuffled ministers given numerous portfolios. He was praying the court docket to deem the motion by President Akufo-Addo as unconstitutional.
Source: Kobina Darlington/peacefmonline.com
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed listed here are these of the writers and don’t replicate these of Peacefmonline.com. Peacefmonline.com accepts no accountability authorized or in any other case for his or her accuracy of content material. Please report any inappropriate content material to us, and we are going to consider it as a matter of precedence. |
Featured Video