Lawyers of Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa have accused the Chief Justice of bias in reconstituting a panel to hear an appeal filed against the North Tongu Member of Parliament.
The appeal has been filed by Rev Victor Kusi Boateng challenging the decision of the High Court to dismiss a contempt of court proceeding against Mr Ablakwa.
The secretary to the Board of Trustees of the National Cathedral filed the contempt application after a video surfaced on social media where the NDC legislator was seen objecting to the service of proceedings in a defamation suit against him.
The initial defamation suit was linked to claims by Mr Ablakwa that Rev Boateng engages in double identity with another name Kwabena Adu Gyamfi.
The contempt application was however dismissed resulting in the instant appeal. Lawyers of Mr Ablakwa have however filed an application seeking the court to strike out some of the grounds of appeal, claiming Rev Boateng cited errors of law as grounds for the appeal without particularising them, in breach of the rules of court.
But before his application could be heard, Thaddeus Sory representing Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa raised a preliminary objection to the constitution of the panel. According to him, events preceding the sitting corroborate a newspaper publication by the Daily Post that the Chief Justice has re-constituted the panel with Justice Pamela Koranteng replacing Justice Dzamefi as the presiding judge.
This act in the view of Sory is in contravention of article 136(2) of the 1992 constitution. He contends that per dictates of Article 136(2) of the constitution, the Chief Justice has no power to reconstitute a panel in such a manner.
Sory also accuses the Chief Justice of exercising her administrative powers with bias.
According to him, Rev Boateng is a spiritual father of the Chief Justice and the replacement of Justice Senyo Dzamesi with Justice Pamela Koranteng who works directly under the Chief Justice as judicial secretary is evidence of bias.
Sory based on these grounds objected to the current constitution of the panel.
Lawyers for Rev Boateng, however, opposed the objection. Bobby Banson leading the team representing Rev Boateng argued that the reliance on a newspaper publication to say the panel has been reconstituted is hearsay evidence and need not be admitted.
He also notes that counsel for Mr Ablakwa cannot just make his allegations against the bench based on the grounds alluded.
To Banson, it is only an attempt to delay the hearing of their application.
The court has adjourned to Wednesday, June 26 to deliver a ruling.
Source:Citinewsroom
Join the Superlaw Channel:
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaT7ZGR9MF8uFCU9Um37
