AG Directed To Handle Ken Agyapong’s Suit Against Judge In Contempt Case

The Supreme Court has asked the Attorney General’s Department to handle Kennedy Agyapong’s application pending against High Court Judge, Amos Wuntah Wuni.

Mr. Agyapong’s lawyers on September 17, invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of the Apex court to stop Justice Wuni’s contempt trial involving the Assin Central Member of Parliament, and to quash all orders made by the Judge in that respect.

The processes at the Supreme court were however served on the Registrar of the High Court through the Judicial Secretary and on behalf of Justice Wuni.

The High Court Registrar subsequently filed an affidavit in opposition to the application without recourse to the Attorney General.

The law lords of the Supreme Court, however, said the processes were procedural to be acted upon by the Attorney General’s Department.

The Supreme Court thus directed that the Attorney General’s Department takes over the case.

The Deputy Attorney General, Godfred Yeboah Dame who was incidentally in Court, was asked to study the affidavit on record and to argue the case in Court on Wednesday, October 14, 2020.

Members of the Court include Justices Baffour Bonne as President, Yaw Appau, Gabriel Pwamang, Amadu Tanko, and Yuonne Kulendi.

Background

Mr Agyapong is in court for allegedly making a statement deemed contemptuous in the case in which Susan Bandoh and Christopher Akuetteh Kotei had sued him, one Ibrahim Jaja, Nana Yaw Duodu aka Sledge and the Inspector General of Police in a land dispute.

On a show aired on Net2 TV, the MP is said to have “scandalised and threatened” the court.

The Chief Justice was petitioned to take action against Mr Agyapong because of the comments.

The petition was written by one, Sulemana Issifu, who described Mr Agyapong’s conduct as “monumental impunity against the courts.”

The Land Court division of the High Court recalled the case today after it adjourned the contempt proceedings to allow the court and lawyers for the legislator to further deliberate on questions of jurisdiction and procedure for the case.

—citinewsroom


Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *