[ad_1]
General News of Friday, July 12, 2019
Source: dailyguidenetwork.com
2019-07-12
Martin Amidu is a special prosecutor
The Supreme Court adjourned for indefinite duration the proceedings challenging the appointment of Martin A.B.K. Amidu as Special Prosecutor of President Akufo-Addo.
This will allow Chief Justice, Judge Sophia Akuffo, to reconstitute the seven-member panel that hears the case.
The reconstitution of the panel was prompted by the imminent retirement of one of the panel members, Judge Sophia Adinyira, scheduled for July 31 this year.
The court indicated that they may not be able to reach a logical conclusion of the trial until their colleague judge retires, hence the need to reconstitute the court.
Order
At its last meeting, the court ordered Dr. Dominic Ayine, NDC deputy for Bolgatanga, to challenge Mr. Amidu's appointment because of his age, to present new legal arguments within three weeks.
The court order followed the writing of the memorandum of the issues in dispute by both parties to the case, according to the court's instructions in February this year.
Tony Lithur, Dr. Ayine's attorney, told the court that he had met with Deputy Attorney General Godfred Yeboah Lady, who had agreed on issues to be considered and then tabled his memorandum.
He therefore asked the court for instructions on the way forward.
The seven-member court presided over by Judge Julius Ansah, composed of Judges Sophia Adinyira, Anin Yeboah, Baffoe-Bonnie, Sulemana Gbadegbe, Samuel Marful Siau and Agnes Dordzie, ordered the parties to file their case within three weeks .
Case
Dr. Ayine has sued the Supreme Court to challenge Mr. Amidu's age as Ghana's first special prosecutor.
The NDC MP, who was Deputy Attorney General under Mahama's previous government, claims compensation, including "a statement that, by correctly interpreting sections 190 (1) (d), 199 (1) (4) and 295 of the 1992 Constitution, the required age for all public office holders established in accordance with Article 190 (1) (d) is 60, but not more than 65 years. "
In its response to the complaint, the Attorney General's Office requested the Supreme Court to reject it, claiming that the complaint was "based on a narrow, inadequate and literal interpretation of the scope of Article 199. of the Constitution ".
He baderted that Mr. Amidu was not "a full party in the prosecution", the action seeking to challenge the Attorney General's decision to appoint Mr. Amidu as Special Prosecutor, as well as his presentation for approval. of Parliament.
He stated that the decision to appoint Mr. Amidu was made within the official duties of the President and the Auditor General, and that Mr. Amidu could not be a party to the prosecution.
He urged the court to file the lawsuit. The court agreed with the Deputy Attorney General and later struck Mr. Amidu's name as defendant.
Source link
