The Chartered Institute of Certified Tax Accountants (CICTA) has sued the National Accreditation Board (NAB), the Institute of Chartered Accountants Ghana (ICAG) and the Attorney General and Minister of Justice over its legal mandate to award any academic or professional qualification that could be accepted for purposes of academic, professional placement or progression.
The National Accreditation Board which is the government agency in charge of accrediting tertiary institutions and the ICAG, a sister professional body, carried out a three-week joint publication from 8th December, 2014 and continued from 7th July, 2015 – ‘with the headline “PUBLIC NOTICE – UNACCREDITED INSTITUTIONS” which warned the public, current students, prospective students and employees that CICTA did not have the legal mandate to award any academic or professional qualification that could be accepted for purposes of academic, professional placement or progression.
CICTA, unhappy about the publications, sued the three institutions seeking various reliefs.
A motion on notice for the enforcement of the fundamental Human Rights of CICTA filed on its behalf by its lawyer, Egbert Faibille Jnr. said the Institute of Chartered Accountants Ghana did not have the authority to act as the regulator of any professional body or institution, including that of the applicant. Legally, the Act which established ICAG Ghana, Chartered Accountants Act, 1963 Act 170 only established the Institution as a State Professional Body for the conduct of Examinations by the Institute and matters related to the accountancy profession. Its regulation covers only the members of the ICAG Professional Body.
The Plaintiff among others, is praying the court to declare that by reason of section 1 of the Professional Bodies Registration Act, 1973 NRCD 143, the applicant is a duly registered Professional Body set up by an Act of Parliament and does not need another Act of Parliament to commence operation.
Additionally, it is praying the Court to hold that there is no law that requires the applicant to be granted a Presidential Charter to operate, particularly when it is not a tertiary institution.
The general damages being sought by the applicant includes an order compelling the respondents to buy space in the Daily Graphic, Times, the Business Times, the Spectator and all other media outlets that published the defamatory publications, and an apology from the respondents in all the newspapers and other media outlets for a stipulated number of days to help restore the lost image.
Hearing of the case commenced at the Human Rights Court I in July, 2015 under his Lordship Justice Dennis Adjei J. A. sitting as an additional High Court Judge. The case is set to continue on 10th May, 2016.
Source: New Crusading Guide
|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.|