Supreme Court adjourns indefinitely Woyome’s attempt to reverse oral examination by Amidu
Alfred Agebsi Woyome

Supreme Court adjourns indefinitely Woyome’s attempt to reverse oral examination by Amidu

Hearing of Mr Alfred Agbesi Woyome’s application to reverse a Supreme Court decision directing him to avail himself for oral examination by the anti-corruption crusader, Mr Martin Amidu, has been adjourned sine die.

Advertisement

This is because the subject matter bordering on his application is currently before the Supreme Court in another case.

Adjourning the case, the presiding judge, Ms Justice Sophia Akuffo, told the parties that the other case had been adjourned to December 13, 2016.

Mr Woyome has filed the substantive motion pursuant to Article 134 (b) of the 1992 Constitution.

Article 134 states that “a single judge may exercise power vested in the Supreme Court not involving the decision of the cause or matter before the Supreme Court except that – (b) in civil matters, any order, direction or decision made or given under this article may be varied, discharged or reversed by the Supreme Court constituted by three Justices of the Supreme Court”.

The other case

The other case, which has David Kwadzo Ametepe as the applicant, is asking the court to declare that  per articles 2 (1), 128, 130 and 134 of the 1992 Constitution, a single justice of the Supreme has no jurisdiction to determine matter(s) involving the interpretation and enforcement of the 1992 Constitution.

He is also seeking a declaration that the ruling by Mr Justice Anin Yeboah directing Mr Woyome to appear and be orally examined was inconsistent with the provisions of articles 2 (1), 128, 130 and 134 of the 1992 Constitution.

Another declaration is that upon a true and proper interpretation of articles 2 (1) and 88 of the 1992 Constitution, a private person does not have the capacity to execute a judgement in favour of the state or on behalf of the state is also being sought.

The applicant also wants the court to declare that Justice Yeboah’s November 16, 2016 decision was unconstitutional and, for that reason, the Supreme Court must set it aside.

Stay of proceedings

The Supreme Court, on December 1, 2016, stayed the oral examination of businessman Mr Woyome by Mr Amidu.

The stay was to enable Mr Woyome’s lawyer, Mr Ken Anku, to move the substantive motion praying the Supreme Court to reverse a November 16, 2016 order directing Mr Woyome to avail himself for oral examination from Mr Amidu.

Granting the application for stay of proceedings pending the determination of his motion to reverse the court’s order directing him to avail himself to be orally examined,  Justice Yeboah said his decision was in the interest of justice.

He also explained that the date for the hearing of the substantive application was a few days away and for that reason it would only be fair for the court to stay proceedings, since the outcome of the substantive matter could affect the issue before him.

But due to the Ametepe case, hearing of Mr Woyome’s substantive appeal has been adjourned sine die.

Background

The motion on notice praying the Supreme Court to reverse its decision directing Mr Woyome to submit himself to oral examination by Mr Amidu was filed on November 24, 2016.

The applicant is arguing that the order granting Mr Amidu leave to examine Mr Woyome and to execute the judgement sins against articles 2, 88, 130 and 134 of the 1992 Constitution and same ought to be reversed.

The decision

The Supreme Court, on November 16, 2016, granted permission to Mr Amidu to orally examine Mr Woyome over his assets.

The court’s directive was aimed at eventually retrieving a GH¢51.2 million judgement debt paid to him.

Justice Yeboah said Mr Amidu had the right under Article 2 of the 1992 Constitution to invoke the original jurisdiction of the court to retrieve the money on behalf of the state.

He said Mr Amidu had locus standi, especially when he initiated the action to retrieve the money.

Arguing on the principles of probity and accountability, the court held that the 1992 Constitution embodied the will and aspirations of the people and for that reason Mr Amidu was entitled to orally examine Mr Woyome.

Connect With Us : 0242202447 | 0551484843 | 0266361755 | 059 199 7513 |

Like what you see?

Hit the buttons below to follow us, you won't regret it...

0
Shares