The UG SRC Judicial Board this evening, commenced hearing on a suit filed by Daniel Bekoe; a level 300 student of the university of Ghana law school, and another against the Legal Advisor of the SRC on the issue pertaining to the dismissal of Derrick Abotsi by H.E. Esinam Seade as the local NUGS President of University of Ghana.
The suit is based on article 28 (B) of the SRC constitution, which states that, …”Have behaved in a manner that brings or has the potential to bring the SRC into disrepute or is otherwise inimical to the SRC, the said chairperson shall be liable to be removed from office by a simple majority of the Executive Committee, which shall consider the matter”.
The plaintiff then claims that the President has no power to unilaterally dismiss a Chairperson and the Judicial Board should therefore declare her action as null and void, unconventional and that an injunction should be placed on her to prevent such acts in the future. The suit goes on to plead the court to issue immediate reinstatement of Derrick Abotsi to his position and any other action the court may deem fit.
Before the plaintiff could move his motion however, Legal Advisor to the SRC moved for a preliminary objection to the suit, which was elaborated on by his co- counsel Nana Boakye Mensah.
In his argument, he quoted article 17.9 of the SRC constitution which states that “the SRC President shall represent the SRC in any court in which proceedings against or on behalf of the SRC are heard”. The defendant then pleaded that since he is not the nominal defendant per that interpretation, the case therefore be struck out and the right thing done.
When asked to reply the defendant, the plaintiff expressed his shock to the court at the “surprise” act of the defendant and said he should have been furnished with copies of their(defendant’s) document.
The court then recessed for 30 minutes to allow plaintiffs prepare a response.
Plaintiff then referred to article 88.5 of the 1992 constitution of the republic which says the Attorney General is the one to sue in the case of grievance against actions of the state, and in this case the legal advisor is the Attorney General. Defendant however, believed since the SRC constitution states the President should represent the SRC in court proceedings, the president should be sued and not him. The court then recessed and returned after a few minutes with their ruling on the preliminary objection.
Justice Asiedu, Justice Ashiele and Justice Bonsu voted in favor of the objection and backed it with article 17.9 of the SRC constitution as well as some precedents including the case involving Mikdad Mohammed vs the Electoral Commission and the legal advisor and Torsu Alfred vs the Electoral Commission and the legal advisor. Justice Andor and Justice Quansah voted against the objection on grounds that, the Attorney General cannot be equated to the President in the academic community. And so with a 3 to 2 majority the objection was stayed and case adjourned to 18th of October 2016 for hearing of the substantive case.
For ugfile.com this is Oswald K Azumah reporting.