Respondents fight Awuni over sale of Merchant Bank
Three respondents in the ongoing court case against the sale of Merchant Bank yesterday launched a three-prong attack against the plaintiff, Andrew Awuni.
Advertisement
The three prayed the Commercial Court to dismiss the case without delay because any further delays could lead to the collapse of the Merchant Bank.
The Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT), the Bank of Ghana and Merchant Bank joined the affidavits filed earlier by lawyer for Fortiz, Tony Lithur, challenging the capacity of Awuni to sue.
Awuni is challenging the sale of SSNIT's 90 per cent stake in Merchant Bank to Fortiz but needs an injunction to stop the parties from taking any further action in completing the sale. The suit has been met with a rigorous defence.
Lawyers for the Bank of Ghana told the court that the Fortiz deal was above board and must not be impeded with a suit meant only to waste the time of the court.
According to Joy News, the lead lawyer described the suit as vexatious and scandalous and must be dismissed.
Lawyer for the Trust told the presiding judge any further delay in dismissing the case would drown the already ailing bank.
He said SSNIT had invested in 12 banks all of which regularly paid dividends to the Trust, except Merchant Bank, which for many months, had been too broke to pay any dividend.
He argued that the suit must be struck out immediately.
He strenuously upheld the argument by the lawyer for Fortiz that Mr Awuni had no locus to sue on behalf of SSNIT contributors, adding Awuni had no reasonable cause for action.
According to him, the boss of the Centre for Freedom and Accuracy is not an active contributor to SSNIT and has lost his right to sue. He said the last time Mr Awuni made any contribution was in 2003.
He was even more surprised by the suit because the plaintiff had not even asked for a remedy of any wrongdoing, insisting investment decisions were taken in the boardroom by board members and not by individuals outside it.
Lawyers for Merchant Bank also joined the chorus in demanding the dismissal of the suit.
According to them, if at all Mr Awuni has any problem with the sale,he should be heading to the Pensions Authority to make a case for redress and not to go to court.
Lawyer for the plaintiff, Egbert Faibille Jnr, is expected to mount a defence tomorrow for his client whose locus has been challenged.
Tall order
Meanwhile, lawyer and Senior Law Lecturer at the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA), Ernest Kofi Abotsi, has described as a tall order the capacity of the plaintiff to untie the lack of locus noose strapped around his neck.
In an interview on Joy News,Mr Abotsi argued that with a trustee situation like we have with SSNIT, the trustee takes decisions on behalf of the shareholders and so for a third party to go behind the trustee and seek remedies in court, that third party must have a solid basis or, at worse an evidence of fraud or wrongdoing.
While admitting a clear public interest case as SSNIT contributors, Abotsi said, "it is a bit difficult to come to an argument that you may just have the right to go behind these people and to say that their actions be set aside when you don't have a clear case of fraud or other untoward behaviour."
He, however, disagreed with the view that the plaintiff ought to have gone to the Pensions Authority and not to the court.
He explained that the court was open for anybody who felt aggrieved on an issue.