<<Print>>

Counsel for one of the sacked judges, Justice Ernest Obimpeh, Ken Anku has threatened a court suit against the five-member Impeachment Committee that ruled against his client.

Speaking in an interview with host Kwami Sefa Kayi on Peace FM's 'kokrokoo', Ken Anku said the procedure that formed the basis for the removal of his client by the Committee was unfair and done in a "hostile atmosphere."

According to him, he and the legal team representing Justice Obimpeh were present during the Committee hearing but the Committee failed to allow them to exercise their right.

“Lawyers are trained to practice with set of rules and procedure, and confronted by a hostile atmosphere that tells you that we don’t tolerate legalities or technicalities here. We are fact-finding. Now, where it suits them; they say go ahead. Where you raise a legal objection, they say no. It’s fact finding.”

President John Dramani Mahama has directed the removal of Justice Ernest Obimpeh and Justice Ajet-Nasam from office for stated misconducts.

President Mahama's directive was made after his acceptance of the recommendations of a Five-member Impeachment Committee that investigated the impeached Justices' behaviour in accordance with article 146 of the Constitution.

But addressing the issue, the Counsel noted that the impeachment of his client "cannot be the end of the road because the final judicial power resides in the court, not in the Committee."

He explained that the President only accepted the recommendations constitutionally; however the Committee members will have to face the court for a final verdict to be determined on the fate of his client.

"You know by the constitution, the President in accordance to the provision [that is one of Article 146] will have to accept the recommendations of the Committee. So, the President only accepted what somebody or some people have booked down below for him. So, they cannot oust the jurisdictions of the court not to look into this matter when the procedures being adopted by the three Committees are different.”

Wondering why ace investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas, who exposé has seen these two Justices removed from the bench, was represented by the State Attorney; Ken Anku further accused some judges in the country of not being bold to support the law.

"Why will the State give him a lawyer? Anas has his own lawyer."

"It was a State Attorney that represented Anas in our case. It was a State Attorney that led him in his evidence-in-Chief. It was a State Attorney that on his behalf cross-examined our client; a whole lot of things wrong with that. Anas has a lawyer. Anas, mind you, has said that he is not collaborating with the State...Anas has his own lawyer. The Council must be for the Committee, not for a private individual...

“Some of our judges support the law. But some of them, they are not being bold...They are all quiet…They are not men of timber and caliber.”