Illegality Of Vodafone Deal

Exposed!
m

An on-going court case has revealed how Ghana’s Parliament had to pass an agreement of sale of the nation’s shares in Vodafone, without the necessary legal procedure; the signature of ex-President John Agyekum Kufuor.
Analysts and political observers are wondering whether Parliament’s haste to approve the agreement could have a linkage to the allegations made then by Honourable Paul Collins Appiah-Ofori, a New Patriotic Party (NPP) Member of Parliament (MP) for Asikuma Odoben Brakwa, that Vodafone paid some Members of Parliament (MPs) $5,000 each, to push the deal through.
Below is published unedited, report of the on-going court case as published by the Daily Graphic last Saturday, July 7, 2012
Parliament acted wrongly in Vodafone deal-report
It emerged at the Commercial Court’s sitting in Accra on Thursday that Parliament acted in contravention of the 1992 Constitution in July 2008 when it ratified a Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) on the sale of Ghana Telecom to Vodafone without the President’s signature.
According to an inter-ministerial committee which was set up in May 2009 to review the sale of Ghana’s 70 per cent shares in Ghana Telecom to Vodafone, then President J.A. Kufuor appended his signature to an agreement between Vodafone UK and Ghana Telecom, while Parliament ratified an agreement between Vodafone International of Holland and Ghana Telecom.
The Director of Policy, Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation at the Ministry of Communications, Mr. Issah Yahaya, read out the committee’s findings, dated September 2009, to the Commercial Court, presided over by Mrs Justice Gertrude Torkonoo, and further stated that Parliament was answerable to the Constitution, not vice versa.
The committee also recommended that the numerous lapses encountered in the SPA rendered the agreement null and void.
Led by counsel for the six plaintiffs who are challenging the sale of Ghana Telecom to Vodafone, Mr Bright Akwetey, the witness said the committee found the SPA inimical to interest and, therefore, made a number of recommendations aimed at protecting the national interest.
Hearing continuous on July 9, 2012.
The Commercial Court is taking evidence for onward delivery to the Supreme Court to enable the Supreme Court to determine whether or not the sale of GT to Vodafone was constitutional.
The plaintiffs in the matter –Professor Agyeman Badu Akosa and five other – sued the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Ghana Telecommunications Company Limited and the Registrar-General over the sale of Ghana Telecom to Vodafone.
The other plaintiffs, who are all members of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), are Mr Michael Kosi Dede, Dr Nii Moi Thompson, Naa Kordai Assimeh, Ms Rhodaline Imoru Ayarna and Mr Kwame Jantuah.
They are calling for a declaration that the sale of GT is inimical to the public interest. They are, therefore, seeking reliefs from the court, including a declaration that the agreement entered into by the government was not in accordance with due process of law and is, therefore, a nullity.
They are also seeking an order declaring that the forcible grouping autonomous state institutions established by law – Voltacom, Fibreco, VRA Fibre Newtwork and VRA Fibre Assets – with GT to form the purported Enlarged GT Group was unlawful and, therefore, void and of no legal effect.
The plaintiffs are further praying for an order of perpetual injunction to restrain the government from disposing of its 70 per cent share in GT to Vodafone or any other foreign company without first exploring avenues for funding and better management in Ghana, among others.
In the substantive suit, the plaintiffs are contending that the SPA entered into among the Government of Ghana, GT and Vodafone for sale of 70 per cent of GT for $900 million was against the public interest and constituted an abuse of the discretionary powers of the government.
They said they were opposed to the unlawful establishment of the said Enlarged GT Group, as it undermined the sovereignty of the country and endangered the national security of Ghana.
According to them, the decision of the government to transfer the assets, properties, shares, equipment, among others, to Vodafone was obnoxious, unlawful and inimical to the public interest, particularly when no consideration was required to be paid by Vodafone for the stated assets.
The plaintiffs argued that the three Ministers of State and the managing director of GT, who signed the agreement on behalf of the government, did not exercise the requisite level of circumspection required of them as public officers in relation to public property.