Another high court judge cited in the judicial bribery scandal, Justice Mohammed Habib Logoh, yesterday filed a writ challenging the legality of impeachment proceedings against him, arguing that he was trapped. Justice Logoh, who was shown on the recorded video allegedly receiving money in an office, is also fighting against the public screening of the audio-visual recording scheduled for September 22 at the Accra International Conference Centre. The judge is seeking a declaration that the audio-visual recording was unlawful and could not be used in determining the outcome of the investigations by the judicial council. Virtually saying that he was trapped by the investigative journalist, Anas Aremeyaw Anas, the embattled judge is asking the court for a “declaration that the purported audio-visual recording and transcripts in which the Plaintiff was allegedly captured are unlawful and the same amount to entrapment.” Justice Logoh is the second high court judge to have sued Tiger Eye PI, the company which undertook the investigations into the judicial bribery, citing the Chief Justice, Georgina Theodora Wood and the Attorney General, Marietta Brew Appiah-Oppong, as defendants in his suit. Justice Paul Dery had also sued Anas, citing entrapment as one of the 17 reliefs being sought. Anas and his Tiger Eye PI company are pushing for the impeachment of all the 34 judges captured in his video, having petitioned President John Mahama and the Chief Justice. However, two of the judges retired before the investigations into the bribery scandal were completed. Justice Logoh is also demanding among ten reliefs from the high court, a declaration that any purported immunity granted Anas by the AG was nullified. He is further praying the court for an order that the continuous leakage of the contents of the audio-visual recording and transcripts by the defendants to media houses and social media platforms is in breach of his rights. He is also asking the court to order a perpetual injunction restraining Tiger Eye, its Chief Executive Officer, workmen, privies and agents from public screening of the said illegal audio-visual recording. He also wants the court to place a perpetual injunction restraining the Chief Justice and the Attorney General from relying on the said audio-visual recording and transcripts in any proceedings howsoever described. He is demanding a cost including legal fees and any other order(s) that the court might deem fit to make.
<<Print>>