You are here: HomeSportsSoccer2002 10 29Article 28841

Soccer News of Tuesday, 29 October 2002

Source: Chronicle

Chief Justice to Kotoko's rescue?

There was drama at the premises of a Kumasi High Court on Monday regarding the case in which coach Ian Porterfield is suing Kumasi Asante Kotoko, its board chairman Mr. P. V. Obeng and the CEO Mr. Herbert Mensah for breach of contract and wrongful dismissal.

The football club and the board chairman have since filed their defence against claims by the coach.

Before Mr. Justice J. K. Abrahams' court is a motion on notice asking for judgement in default of defence against Herbert Mensah for not filing his defence to Porterfield's action.

While waiting for proceedings to begin some persons whose identity Chronicle could not establish openly boasted that the Chief Justice' (CJ) influence would be invoked to sway the course of justice in the case.

They claimed Kotoko management would use the authority of the CJ to set aside an injunction order made in favour of Porterfiled by the court.

It was propagated that the CJ would even have the entire case dismissed because it was both an indictment and an embarrassment to Kotoko and its management.

According to the persons all that was required to effect the desired direction of the case was a single telephone call from the CJ to the judge.

The sources asserted their claims saying the CJ is in constant touch with the judge on a daily basis to make sure the case is struck out.

Counsel for Porterfield, Mr. Kwasi Afrifa, when contacted on the possibility of the case being dismissed as claimed said he doubted if the CJ would descend into the arena of conflict and seek to influence the outcome of the case.

He drew the attention of this reporter to the crudsade mounted by the CJ to rid the dispensation of justice in Ghana of influence peddling and corruption.

Afrifa also doubted if the judge would go against his judicial oath and deliver justice with affection or ill-will.

As if by design, Justice Abrahams did not sit last Monday when the motion was billed to be heard.The motion has been adjourned to Wednesday October 30 while the substantive is on November 4.