SC Boots Out AG Over Gitmo 2

The Supreme Court yesterday struck out the case of the Attorney General in the matter over the agreement signed by the NDC government with...

The Supreme Court yesterday struck out the case of the Attorney General in the matter over the agreement signed by the NDC government with the United States of America to bring to Ghana the two hardcore terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay The seven member panel of Justices presided over by Justice William Atuguba held that the case before them was not about the conduct of the US government but that of the government of Ghana. The panel of judges also struck out another aspect of the state’s case about whether or not an assessment by the US Department of Defence on the terrorist was admissible; an issue the court had already determined. Nana Adjei Baffour Awuah, lawyer for the plaintiffs-Margaret Bamfo, an 86-year old retired Conference Officer of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Henry Nana Boakye, a student of Ghana School of Law prayed the court for leave for further arguments. This was after Sylvester Williams, Chief State Attorney had announced the withdrawal of the said claims. Sitting continues of February 8, 2017. The inspection of the agreement by the court was done in camera on July 6, 2015 and that will determine whether by its nature and scope, details of the agreement should be disclosed to the public. Parent Suit Two Ghanaians are asking the Supreme Court to declare that President John Mahama acted unconstitutionally by accepting the Al-Qaeda terrorists to Ghana. The case took a new twist on April 12 when the defendants made up of the Attorney-General and the Minister of the Interior filed a process averring that Ghana actually had an existing agreement with the United States government regarding the two detainees whose presence continues to generate public uproar. The revelation by the AG was a sharp departure from the government’s widely-held position that the acceptance of the two Al-Qaeda foot soldiers: Mahmud Umar Muhammad Bin Atef, 36 and Khalid Muhammad Salih Al-Dhuby, 34, was purely a “diplomatic arrangement exercised through an executive power by the President.” Proper Interpretation The plaintiffs are seeking, among other reliefs, a declaration that on a true and proper interpretation of Article 75 of the1992 Constitution of Ghana, the President of the Republic of Ghana acted unconstitutionally by agreeing to the transfer of Mahmud Umar Muhammad Bin Atef and Khalid Muhammad Salih Al-Dhuby (both profiled terrorist and former detainees of Guantanamo Bay) to the Republic of Ghana without ratification by an Act of Parliament or a resolution of Parliament supported by the votes of more than one-half of all the members of Parliament. They are further seeking a declaration that on a true and proper interpretation of Article 58(2) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the President of the Republic of Ghana who is under an obligation to execute and maintain laws of Ghana breached the Anti-terrorism Act of 2008 (Act 762) and the Immigration Act of 2000 (Act 573), both being laws passed under the 1992 Constitution of Ghana. Other justices on the panel were Sophia Akufo, Jones Victor Dotse, Anin Yeboah and Paul Baffoe Bonney.

Source: Daily Guide