Adim Odoom, the man who blew the lid off the alleged rot at the Ministry of Youth and Sports in relation to immediate past minister, Muntaka Mohammed Mubarak's purported reckless spending, yesterday had his day in court when an Accra Fast Track High Court commenced hearing of an action he instituted against the Attorney-General and Head of Civil Service.
At yesterday's hearing, the Attorney-General suffered the first blow when Justice Norvisi Aryene, the presiding judge, awarded costs of GH¢500 against her for failure to act in accordance with the rules of the court.
When the case was called, counsel for the accountant, Godfried Yeboah Dame, told the court that he had just been served with an amended statement of case but the rules on it states that leave of the court must be sought before the respondent can competently file that process.
According to him, the defendants failed to seek leave of the court, describing the action of the respondent as “not only a violation of the rules but also an attempt to distort the perimeters of the dispute before the court or muddy the waters”.
He prayed for same to be struck out or costs of GH¢1000 awarded against the Attorney-General.
However, Elikplim Agbemava, a state attorney, admitted that he indeed did not seek the attention of the court because he was “under the impression that the matter was urgent” and said he would seek leave of the court if the court deemed it fit, but the trial Judge, Mrs. Justice Novisi Aryene said even though no leave was sought, the court would admit the statement of case subject to costs of GH¢500.
Mr. Agbemava then went ahead to move the motion to strike out the name of the Head of the Civil Service from the suit and noted that under Article 88 of the Constitution, persons who have suits against heads of state institutions should direct them to the Attorney-General .
According to him, it was unnecessary to rope in the head of the Civil Servant and he prayed the court to strike out his name.
Counsel for Mr. Odoom, in responding to the motion, observed that the application was misconceived and borne out of a narrow interpretation of the Constitution, which does not prohibit, exclude or render immune any head of state institution from any relevant suit.
He said if what the state has said was anything to go by, then certain state institutions or their heads like the Inspector General of Police and the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) would not be included in suits.
Counsel added that the act of joining the head of Civil Service in the suit was proper, especially since certain reliefs were being claimed against him including an order for him to permit the Applicant, Adim Odoom, to resume his normal duties as a civil servant.
Counsel cited certain authorities to show that in certain situations, even the Chief Justice has been sued before and the Supreme Court had approved of same.
The case has been adjourned to November 11, 2009, for ruling.
The plaintiff, who is also the former Principal Accountant of the ministry, has been on interdiction since July and is surviving on half of his salary.
He believes he has been treated unfairly because he is entitled to state protection in accordance with the Whistle Blowers Act, and not victimisation.
By Fidelia Achama
BoG's $260 million building: It was Ato Forson who first proposed 'sell-and-leas...
'We have to do soul-searching' — Mahama orders nationwide flood assessment
Court orders woman beater to pay GHS5,000 compensation to midwife at Tema Commun...
Over 12,000 women living with obstetric fistula in Ghana — Asokwa MP
Mahama secures 1,840 farm equipment deal from Belarus
Titus Glover slams Mahama’s flood report directive, calls it “waste of energy an...
We have increased posting of doctors from 12 to 100 to underserved regions in 20...
'You had the effrontery to call me struggling lawyer, you won't come back to pow...
Belarus manufacturers to storm Ghana next week after President's visit
Government to offer tax incentives for factories located outside Accra
