Okudzeto disagrees with Amidu on constitutionality of ‘Vikileaks’ committee
Former President of the Ghana Bar Association, Mr Sam Okudzeto has said there was nothing wrong with the Chief Justice setting up a committee to look into allegations of judicial misconduct against some justices of the Supreme Court.
Advertisement
According to him, the committee was to establish a prima facie case and has nothing to do with the removal of any of the Justices as has been suggested by former Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Mr Martin Amidu.
Mr Amidu, in a statement last Monday questioned the constitutionality of the CJ’s action.
He argued that the constitution does not entrust any disciplinary power over superior court justices to the Chief Justice or the Judicial Council or to an appointments and disciplinary committee or any other committee of the judicial council.
It would be recalled that in a recently leaked tape recording, dismissed Deputy Communications Minister, Victoria Hammah was heard alleging the Minister of Gender, Nana Oye Lithur played a role in securing a favourable verdict for President Mahama in the election petition.
The opposition New Patriotic Party subsequently petitioned the Chief Justice to investigate the allegations.
In response the CJ set up an 8-member committee to look into the matter within two weeks.
Contributing to discussions on the constitutionality of the committee on Radio XYZ Wednesday morning, Mr John Ndebugre, also a former Member of Parliament for Zebilla supported Mr Amidu’s argument that the CJ got it wrong.
Other Trending Stories
Mr Ndebugri, like Mr Martin Amidu, questioned the constitutional basis for setting up the committee and said it would come to nothing.
But Mr Okudzeto contributing to the discussions argued that what the Chief Justice has done was in the right direction because it was important for the minds of the public to be cleared as far as these matters were concerned.
He said the judiciary was the last stop as far as matters of legal rights were concerned so if people have doubts, it is important that it is cleared especially in matters such as the Victoria Mahama tape issue.
“Of course, if it turns out that there was merit in what Victoria Mahama said, there were laid down procedures for how it would be handled like referring it to the President for the law to take its course.”
“… it seems to me that they (Amidu and Ndebugre) just got the understanding of the issue completely out of gear with the realities of the situation.”
“I know they were quoting sections of the constitution but sometimes you can apply a wrong rule to an issue and then come to a conclusion about it”.
Mr Okudzeto said the chapter they (Amidu and Ndebugri) were quoting was on removal of justices of the superior court and chairmen of regional tribunals.
“I do not know where they got the impression that the chief justice has set up a committee to remove any judge because no such committee has been set up by the chief justice.”
He said the matter has been referred to a committee which was already in existence, under section 164 of the constitution which is the Judicial Council.
He said section 125 sub section 4 states that “The Chief Justice shall be the head of the judiciary and shall be responsible for administration and supervision of the judiciary.
“Simple question is, if a person has responsibility for supervision of the administration of justice and somebody makes a statement to the effect that judges have been corrupted or judges were seen in other to give a certain decision, is she supposed to fold her arms and do nothing about it?”
“Don’t forget that if somebody has to petition the president, the president would have to ensure that there was a prima facie case and a committee of the judicial council is the one to deal with the issue.”
Advertisement
Mr Okudzeto thinks that if the Chief Justice were to fold her arms, the impression in the public’s mind would remain that the judiciary was corrupt hence there was the need for investigations to be undertaken once there has been a complaint for the air to be cleared.
But on his part, Mr John Ndebugre argued that it was right for people to raise issues, however he said the processes to deal with the matter has not been done properly.
He said the probe committee was embarking on an exercise in futility and that, any such petition , should have been based on an allegation, not idle gossip, upon which the sub-committee of the judiciary council appears to have based its investigative actions upon.
“In any case, if there is an allegation, it must be against a specific member of the judiciary or the Superior Court and the petition must go to the President, not to the Chief Justice at the first instant”, he said.
Advertisement
He suggested a judicial review instead but Mr Okudzeto said, “you cannot have a judicial review of the case which already has been handled by the court”.