Home   >   Politics   >   Politics   >   201211
No Show At Amiduís Woyome Case
<< Prev  |  Next >>
Comments ( 0 )     Email    Print
Related Stories
THE SUPREME Court has adjourned sine die a suit filed by Martin Amidu, a former Attorney-General, challenging the payment of GHĘ51,283,480.59 to businessman Alfred Woyome as judgment debt.

The nine-member panel presided over by Justice Date-Bah was to hear the matter yesterday but had to adjourn it because one of the justices was indisposed.

Justice Date-Bah informed the parties that they would be informed of the new date for hearing.

Mr. Amiduís writ is against the Attorney-General, Waterville Holdings (BVI) Limited, Austro-Invest Management Limited and Alfred Agbesi Woyome.

In his writ, Mr. Amidu raised the issue of whether or not the Republic of Ghana can pay claims for a loan transaction which never went to Parliament and were never received by the Government of Ghana.

Mr. Amidu, who said his action was based on public interest, argued that on a true and proper interpretation of Article 181(3), (4), (5), and (6) and the spirit of the 1992 Constitution, the Republic of Ghana cannot incur liability for any foreign or international loan or expenses incidental to such foreign or international loan transactions without Parliamentary approval of the transaction for it to be operative and binding on the Republic of Ghana.

He is asking for certain reliefs including an order directed at Mr. Woyome, Waterville and Austro-Invest to refund to the Republic of Ghana all sums of money paid to them severally or jointly upon or as a result of the unconstitutional conduct of the AG in purported pursuance of the two inoperative agreements of 26th April 2006 or ďany other unconstitutional agreement as having been made and received by them in violation of Article 181 of the ConstitutionĒ.

In addition, he is questioning the jurisdiction of the High Court to have entertained Mr. Woyomeís suit against the Republic of Ghana on grounds that he lacked the locus standi to, in the first place, cause an action against the state in the absence of a contract with the Government of Ghana.

According to him, if the Supreme Court does not intervene to restore compliance with the provisions of the Constitution as pleaded, the defendants will continue to engage in their unconstitutional conduct of demanding and paying interests and other cost and cause the Republic of Ghana further unauthorized loss of resources.

On this grounds, he prayed the court to make a declaration that the manner in which the AG paid sums of money in Euros to Waterville in purported pursuance of claims arising out of the two said agreements, each dated 26h April 2006, is inconsistent with and in contravention of the letter and spirit of the 1992 Constitution, ďparticularly Article 181(5) thereof and is each accordingly null, void, and without effect whatsoeverĒ.
Source: Mary Anane

Comments ( 0 ): Post Your Comments >>

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not reflect those of Peacefmonline.com. Peacefmonline.com accepts no responsibility legal or otherwise for their accuracy of content. Please report any inappropriate content to us, and we will evaluate it as a matter of priority.