You are here: HomeNews2015 11 12Article 393517

General News of Thursday, 12 November 2015

Source: classfmonline.com

Amidu hints at suing Anas’ Tiger Eye

Anas Aremeyaw Anas  and Martin Amidu in an enhanced photo Anas Aremeyaw Anas and Martin Amidu in an enhanced photo

Former Attorney General Martin Amidu has said he may sue investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas' Tiger Eye PI firm, in his quest to expose the company as a "fraudulent" company.

“…An anti-corruption campaigner must show integrity, must not be an agency of government, it doesn’t matter whether you disclose your agency. So, I think that if it comes to going to court, we may have to do that,” he told Citi FM Thursday.

Mr Amidu alleged in one of his various articles that Mr Anas’ firm is a fake company because it is not registered by law.

Mr. Amidu, who has won himself the nickname “Citizen Vigilante” for his fight against corruption, disclosed that Tiger Eye PI, which signed the petitions for impeachment of 34 judges he secretly filmed, taking bribe to pervert justice, is not registered in the register of companies in Ghana as a legal person capable of acting on its own.

According to him, Section 15(1) of the Companies Code, 1963 (Act 179) mandatorily required that: “The last name of the name of a company limited by shares shall be ‘Limited’.” In his opinion, Tiger Eye PI “has, therefore, always been a dummy and fraudulent scam on domestic and international public”.

He said the two companies in the register of companies with the same sole shareholder are Tiger Eye PI Media Limited, (with No. CA-57,545 incorporated on 7th April 2009) and Cobra Eye International Media Limited (with No. CA-57,546 also incorporated on 7th April 2009), both for-profit companies, which might also be unlawfully operating as private investigation organisations in Ghana without being licensed and permitted by the Minister of the Interior to carry on the business of private investigations and to employ any employees for that purpose in contravention of Regulations 1(1), 5, and 14 of the Police Service (Private Security Organisations) Regulations, 1992 (LI 1571).

Mr Anas’ Counsel has rebuffed the claims and accused Mr Amidu of being used as a henchman to divert attention from the substance of the investigative journalist’s exposé.