<<Print>>

The Head of the Commercial Crimes Unit of the Criminal Investigations Department of the Ghana Police, DSP Gifty Mawuenyegah, has been in the custody of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) since December 29, 2010 and has instructed her counsel to sue for unlawful detention. Although top police officials at the CID have failed to confirm the detention of their colleague or otherwise, lawyer E. A Vordoagu, a counsel for Mawuenyegah, revealed on Citi Eyewitness News on Thursday that his client has spent the past eight nights including Thursday in BNI cells. Lawyer Vordoagu said the national intelligence outfit has grossly disrespected the rights of DSP Mawuenyegah for detaining her beyond the constitutionally required 48 hours and for that matter are dragging the BNI director to court on Friday to explain why his client has been refused bail. �We are preparing ourselves to go to court with Habeas corpus [a writ or legal action through which a person in custody can be released from unlawful detention] on the BNI director to explain why she is being held without explanation. All these things happening are illegality and are abusing her human rights of liberty and freedom,� the lawyer argued. Mr. Vordoagu said the security officer is being held on allegations that on about nine occasions she ensured that relatives of the key suspect in the cocaine-turned-baking soda case, Nana Ama Martin, met her anytime they came to visit at the CID headquarters and could have colluded with them in the cocaine swap. Secondly, BNI officials, according to the lawyer, have alleged that she helped the suspect to hire the services of a lawyer to defend her in the cocaine case. �She [Mawuenyagah] confirmed that the accused person was somebody known to her junior sister and for that matter when the unfortunate thing happened she [younger sister] mentioned the friend to her,� he said. Touching on Mawuenyagah�s role to make it possible for Martin�s relatives to visit her frequently while in police custody, lawyer Vordoagu said, �she confirmed it and said that is not the only instance an officer is doing that because most of the officers do. It was not anything unusual. What she did was not done in a way to obstruct the administration of justice. �