You are here: HomeWallSayIt Loud2021 09 13ANIN YEBOAH NOT FIT FOR OFFICE LAWYER AFRIFA (Beans)

Say It Loud


2021-09-13 10:51:58

Where is my popcorn?

In his suit filed on August 24, 2021, Kwesi Afrifa, is praying the court for seven (7) reliefs in total/

First, he is asking the court for "a declaration that it is wrongful, illegal impermissible and abusive of the Office of Chief Justice for the 1st Defendant to use the Judicial Secretary of the Judicial Service established under Article 125 of the Constitution, 1992, as an independent arm of government to file a complaint to the Criminal Investigation Division of the Ghana Police Service at the National Police Headquarters, Accra against the Plaintiff in a matter personal to the 1st Defendant".

Secondly, "a declaration that the conduct of the 1st Defendant in using panel members of the 2nd Defendant to prosecute a personal matter against the Plaintiff constitutes usurpation of a judicial tribunal and an interference in the administration of justice and is prejudicial to the delivery of justice and independence of the said judicial tribunal contrary to his oath of office, the law and best practices befitting the high office of Chief Justice".

The third relief he is seeking from the court is "a declaration that the Plaintiff's response to a purported complaint instigated engineered and directed by the 1st Defendant using one Ogyeedom Obranu Kwesi Atta IV as a surrogate dated 1st March, 2021 to the 2nd Defendant is not actionable in law and does not breach any rule of law, practice or prescription".

Fourth, "a declaration that it is wrongful and abusive of his office for the 1st Defendant to permit, direct and positively encourage his wife to use his official title as part of, or an appendage to, her personal business contrary to the ethics and dignity of the high office of Chief Justice of Ghana".

Fifth, "a declaration that it is unlawful, illegal and unconstitutional for the 1st Defendant not to make a full frank and comprehensive declaration of his assets prior to his vetting and appointment and that his failure so to do is subversive of good governance and an infraction of the Constitution and laws of Ghana".

The last two reliefs lawyer Afrifa is asking for from the are "a declaration that the pattern of illegal improper unconstitutional and flagrant disregard for propriety exhibited by the 1st Defendant makes him unfit for the high and exalted office of Chief Justice of Ghana" and "Perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants, their agents, representatives or persons acting at their behest or direction including the Ghana Police Service from interfering with the plaintiff's inalienable and constitutional rights and freedom of expression as well as an order of injunction restraining the 3rd Defendant from being a part of any panel constituted in relation to all matters between the Plaintiff and the 1st Defendant on grounds of actual and demonstrated bias, prejudice and an intense sense of obligation towards the 1st Defendant which has been demonstrated even in writing".

According to the statement of claim filed by Mr Afrifa (the Plaintiff), he contends "that the 1st Defendant has been directing and controlling the proceedings of the 2nd Defendant through his lifelong friend, the 3rd Defendant as a result of which the 3rd Defendant has been given information privately by the 1st Defendant which information was brazenly used by the 3rd Defendant at the proceedings of the 2nd Defendant".

The Plaintiff also contends that "it is wrong, morally-dishonest and ethically abhorrent for the Defendants to singularly and in concert resort to the use of evidence not before the 2nd Defendant as the basis for adjudication with a view to damnifying the Plaintiff in a manner occasioning a substantial miscarriage of justice to the Plaintiff".

"The Plaintiff further states that by compromising its supposed neutrality the 2nd Defendant has dragged one Michael Anin Yeboah unnecessary and needlessly into the fray and has used him as the basis of a formal charge levied against the Plaintiff by the 2nd Defendant".

He further "contend that the independent and neutral disposition which should indispensably attach to the Defendants in the conduct of their work has been damaged irreparably thus negating the object duty and performance of public responsibility in a manner destructive of public confidence and trust which should ordinarily attend their activity and/or positions".

"The integrity, stainless transparency and honesty which should be central and integral to the activities of the Defendants particularly the 2nd and 3rd Defendants in the present circumstance is lost and in its place has been erected a pernicious pillar of seamless, unrelenting and unmitigated conflict of interest and unabashed prejudice and a desire to crucify the Plaintiff and deprive him the use and benefit of the only profession he knows" Mr Afrifa further claimed in his statement.

[This is an authentic posting from Mr Beans (Registered User)]
Your Comment:

Your Name:

Comment to Topic