The Supreme Court will on May 13, 2020, decide whether or not Mr Martin Amidu is eligible to be Special Prosecutor.
A seven-member panel of the court presided over by the Chief Justice, Justice Anin Yeboah was today (Wednesday, April 29, 2020) expected to deliver its judgment but adjourned it to May 13.
The suit challenging the eligibility of Mr Amidu was filed by a former Deputy Attorney General, Dr Dominic Ayine in February 2018.
Constitutional interpretation
Dr Ayine, who is also the Member of Parliament (MP) for Bolgatanga East, went to the apex court to seek a constitutional interpretation with a case that Mr Amidu was 66 when he was nominated, and, therefore, he was ineligible to be the Special Prosecutor.
It is his contention that by a true and proper interpretation of Articles 190 (1) (d), 199 (1), 199 (4) and 295 of the 1992 Constitution, the retiring age of all holders of public offices created pursuant to Article 190 (1) (d) was 60 years and not beyond 65 years.
The legislator named the A-G and Mr Amidu as defendants in his legal action, but on February 5, 2019, the court struck out the name of the Special Prosecutor as a defendant after it had held that he was not a proper party to the action.
Ayine’s case
A statement of case accompanying Dr Ayine’s writ stated that by nominating and appointing Mr Amidu to be vetted and approved by Parliament, both the A-G and the President, respectively, had violated Article 199 (1) of the 1992 Constitution.
“The Office of the Special Prosecutor was established by an Act of Parliament pursuant under Article 190 (1) (d) of the 1992 Constitution, which confers on Parliament the power to create such other public services as it may prescribe, in addition to the public services spelt out in Chapter 14 of the 1992 Constitution.
“The Office of the Special Prosecutor is, thus, a creature of the Constitution to the extent that it is a direct offshoot of a power drawn from Article 190. Once Parliament passed Act 959 and the President assented to it on January 2, 2018, the Office of the Special Prosecutor became part of the public service and governed by the constitutional provisions relating to the public service and public office holders,” the statement of case noted.
A-G’s defence
In the State’s defence, however, Mr Dame argued that public servants compulsorily retired at the age of 60, with a further possibility of extension of their years of service under Article 199 (4), and that not all public officials were caught by the compulsory retirement age of 60.
The State is, therefore, praying the court to hold that the position of Special Prosecutor is a public office (organ) like the Statute Law Revision Commissioner, not caught by the retiring age prescriptions in Article 199.
“It is submitted that to place the constraints of age on a person who exercises prosecutorial powers when the Constitution has not specifically provided for same is plainly untenable,” the deputy A-G argued.
The deputy A-G further submitted that by the combined effect of Articles 88 (4) and 298 of the 1992 Constitution, the enactment of Act 959 to provide for the appointment of a Special Prosecutor on a non-renewable seven-year tenure and the subsequent appointment of Mr Amidu to that office were within the rightful legislative competence of Parliament.
Mr Dame, therefore, wants the court to give full force and effect to the powers of Parliament, as the legislative body of Ghana, to provide for all matters, except as are not in contravention of, or inconsistent with, the 1992 Constitution.
Source: Daily Graphic
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not reflect those of Peacefmonline.com. Peacefmonline.com accepts no responsibility legal or otherwise for their accuracy of content. Please report any inappropriate content to us, and we will evaluate it as a matter of priority. |
SHOULD IN CASE MARTIN AMIDU FAILS TO QUALIFY, PER THE JUDGEMENT OF THE SC, LAWYER MAURICE AMPAW SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR THE OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR. WE NEED AN INTELLIGENT AND A PASSIONATE PERSON TO LEAD THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTIONNN AND DISHONESTY. MANY FEEL DISAPPOINTEDD FOR THE LACKK OF ACTION AT THE OSP. GHANA IS NOT GETTING BETTER IN THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTIONN, IN THE GLOBAL RATING. GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ARE INVOLVED IN CORRUPTIONN INTERNATIONALLY, DAMAGINGG THE IMAGE OF GHANA, YET WE DON'T GET ANYBODY PROSECUTED. WE NEED TO GET OUR STOLENN MONEY BACK. WE HAVE THIS DOMESTIC SAGA OF DOUBLE SALARY FOR SOME TIME NOW, YET THERE IS NO ACTION ON IT. THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS DAMAGE TO THE IMAGE OF NPP. I DON'T KNOW WHO HAS BECOME "THE KOKOTAKO" TO WITHHOLD BACK THE CASE. HE IS NOT DOING ANY GOOD TO AKUFO ADDO GOVERNMENT AND HIS LEGACY. WE MUST SEND THE RIGHT SIGNALS TO OUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS THAT THEY CANNOT ROBBB AND MISUSEEE PUBLIC MONEY WITH IMPUNITYY. IT IS DISTURBING TO SPEND SO MUCH TO ESTABLISH THE OSP WITHOUT THE COMMENSURATE RETURNS. I WISH THE REFUSAL OF MARTIN WOULD NOT HAVE ANY NEGATIVE IMPACT, TO BECOME A BAD PRECEDENCE FOR THE EXERCISE OF JUSTICE BY THE SC, I WOULD HAVE YEARNED FOR IT. NPP SHOULD KNOW THAT GHANAIANS ONCE HAD A PASSION FOR JJ REGIME BECAUSE WE HAD HOPE IN HIS PROMISE TO FREE THE NATION FROM CORRUPTION TO GIVE IT JUSTICE. THE SAME GHANAINS REJECTED J J WHEN HIS REGIME BECAME CORRUPT LIKE OR THAN HIS PREDECESSORS TO LEAVE GHANA TO IMF AND HIPC. NOTHING IS DESTRUCTIVE TO NATION BUILDING THAN CORRUPTION. NO MATTER WHAT A LEADER ACHIEVES, HE IS NOT SUCCESSFUL IF HE NEGLECTS TO FIGHT CORRUPTION AGGRESSIVELY TO ADVANCE PUBLIC JUSTICE.
Ah how I wish Dr Dominic Ayine won this case so that the incompetent talkative non performing SP is removed to pave way for the appointment of a younger and more capable person to take over. I would vouch for Godfried Yeboah Dame