[ad_1]
General News on Tuesday, April 30, 2019
Source: Mynewsgh.com
2019-04-30
Judge dery
The West African Economic Community (ECOWAS) Court of Justice on Monday dismissed three judges of the High Court of Ghana dismissed for failing to prove that their rights were violated during the proceedings leading to the disciplinary measures taken against them by the Judicial Council of Ghana.
The judges – Paul Uuter Dery, Mustapha Habib Logoh and Gilbert Ayisi Addo – were among more than 30 secretly filmed judges while they allegedly accepted bribes as part of a secret investigation conducted in 2015 by the journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas.
The ECOWAS Supreme Court, presided over by Judge Dupe Atoki and composed of three people, dismissed the complaint, claiming that the secret deposit of judges in their offices, carried out without their consent, constituted an infringement of their right to privacy. but that this interference was justifiable. it aimed to denounce the illegal behavior of public officials.
The court upheld the State of Ghana's argument that the secret shooting of judges was corroborated by Section 1 (1) (b) of the Whistle Blower Act of Ghana and Section 61 of the Criminal Code. Ghana's Data Protection Act.
It found that the applicants' right to privacy was hindered by the secret filming of their activities by Anas, but then baderted that the interference, based on national law, was in accordance with the law.
The court noted that as judges, who denied neither the knowledge nor the ignorance of the law, they had to know that their conduct would be subject to control as public officers.
It was further agreed with the State of Ghana that, in the alleged bribe, the petitioners were to know that they would be open to a secret investigation.
The court held that the interference with the applicants' right to privacy, aimed at denouncing the commission of a crime, was justified and necessary in a democratic society.
The applicants, as judges, are civil servants, who receive public funds are accountable to the public and may be subject to investigation if they have reasonable grounds to suspect their involvement in the commission of a crime. .
"The secret registration of the applicants is necessary in a democratic society. The badertion of violation of the right to privacy fails, "said the court.
The court also found that the applicants had not proved their allegation that the defendant had violated their rights to a fair trial, non-discrimination / equality before the law and the right to work. .
The court noted that while two of the applicants had not responded to the Chief Justice's request, they had challenged their suspension and investigation before the Supreme Court and had lost in the six cases they had filed.
According to the court, after having properly exercised their right of access to the court to the highest court of Ghana, the applicants can not claim to have been deprived of a fair trial.
The judges were suspended in 2016 by the Ghana Judicial Council while a committee set up by the Chief Justice, Judge Sophia Akuffo, was investigating a petition written against them by Anas and his company, Tiger Eye PI Limited.
During the suspension, they were put on half of the wages and at the end of his investigation, the committee recommended their removal, which the Ghanaian president approved in December 2018.
In the case they brought before the ECOWAS court in 2016, through the intermediary of their lawyer, Nii Kpakpo Samoa Addo, the applicants alleged that the Government had violated their fundamental rights. Ghana following the suspension of some of their allowances and the payment of half of the compensation paid. their salary, due to ongoing disciplinary proceedings against them initiated by the Judicial Council of the country.
The petitioners stated that the Ghanaian State had violated their rights to justice and administrative justice, to equality before the law and the right not to be discriminated against, the privacy and work, including acting on behalf of the board, paying them half of their monthly salary, suspending their allowances and setting up a panel to investigate them.
Source link
