<<Print>>

An Accra High Court has adjourned hearing of a suit filed by the Consumer Protection Agency (CPA) seeking the Court to set aside the 59.2% and 67.2% increase in electricity and water tariffs respectively, to January 8, 2015.

The court presided over by Justice Mrs. Norvisi Aryene said “I am not ready to hear the case today,” because she had not received all the motions for the trial to commence.

When the case was called, Counsel for the Volta River Authority, Kweku Ansah, told the court that they had filed a motion to set aside the writ by CPA, but, the trial judge responded by saying, “there is nothing on my file to show anything has been filed yet.”

Though counsel for CPA, Mr. Egbert Faibille Jnr, told the court that the matter before it was very important, the judge asked the parties to choose a date in the New Year. She subsequently adjourned the case to January 8 after both parties had agreed on the date.

Background

The CPA sued the Public Utility Regulatory Commission (PURC) alongside the Electricity Company of Ghana, Volta River Authority and Ghana Grid Company, as well as the Northern Electricity Development Company after the recent tariff increment.

The CPA argued that stakeholders in the power production and supply chain had failed to live up to expectation, hence, its decision to stop the tariff increment by placing an interlocutory injunction on its implementation.

But, the PURC on Friday December 1 also filed a suit at the court seeking to set aside the case brought against it by the CPA.

The Chief Executive Officer of the CPA, Kofi Owusuhene, popularly known as Kofi Kapito, who filed the suit on Friday December 11, concluded that “the conduct of the PURC is illegal and unless compelled by the Court, defendants would continue to overreach plaintiffs.”

Reliefs

The plaintiff against this backdrop is seeking “a declaration that the power 1st defendant exercises pursuant to Section 3(a) of Act 538 to provide guidelines on rates chargeable for provision of utility services, which includes electricity tariffs, is discretionary pursuant to Article 296 of the 1992 Constitution.

“A declaration that the power 1st defendant exercises pursuant to Section 3(b) of Act 538 to examine and approve rates chargeable for provision of utility services guidelines on rates chargeable for provision of utility services, including electricity tariff, is discretionary pursuant to Article 296 of the 1992 Constitution.

“A declaration that 1st Defendant in announcing the tariff increases for the benefit of 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th Defendants has not acted pursuant to any regulation provided for in any constitutional or statutory instrument as required by Article 296(c) of the 1992 Constitution.

“A declaration that the Rate Setting Guidelines relied on by 1st Defendant to announce the tariff increases for the benefit of 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th Defendants are not regulations provided for in a constitutional instrument or statutory instrument.

“A declaration that the decision by 1st Defendant to approve increases in tariff is unfair in the light of the persistent, irregular and unpredictable power outages pejoratively known as 'Dumsor'.

“An order setting aside the tariff increase announced by 1st Defendant for the benefit of 2nd, 3rd and 4th Defendants as being illegal and invalid.

“An order of perpetual injunction restraining 1st Defendant, its officials, assigns, privies, servants, any person claiming under or through it and howsoever described from increasing utility tariffs without publishing regulations in a constitutional or statutory instrument as to the basis of the discretionary power as provided for by Article 296 of the 1992 Constitution.

“An order of perpetual injunction restraining 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th Defendants, their officials, privies, servants, hirelings and underlings and/or any person claiming through them jointly and/or severally and howsoever described from charging electricity tariff increases on the basis of the tariff increases announced by 1st Defendant with effect from Monday, the 14th day of December, 2015. General damages. Costs. Any other relief(s) which this Honorable Court deems just and equitable.”

Reason for court action

The CPA's court action follows a rejection of the new tariffs by organized labour which has demanded a reduction and suspension of the implementation until 2016.

The Trades Union Congress has further demanded a fresh meeting with the PURC over the increases. Some political parties have also described the timing of the increase as insensitive, particularly, going into the Christmas festivities.

Demonstration

Members of the Tema District Council of Labour (TDCL) have begun wearing red armbands. They have also started hoisting red flags in protest against the recent hikes in utility prices.

The leadership of organized labour is warning of massive demonstrations in the coming days if current actions are not aggressive enough. Its members unanimously voted to embark on the demonstration and ultimately declare a strike.

“All the workers at Tema converged at the Anchor of Hope Catholic Church. We took a decision to wear red armbands and then write a letter to the employer to allow us fly red flags.

“We wanted to start a demonstration and then a strike but because of the Christmas activities, the police will be giving excuses so we decided to wear red armbands and then first week in January, 2016, there will be a big demonstration,” chairman of TDCL, Wilson Agana told Starr News.

Daily Heritage