The Supreme Court has struck out a request to restrain Johnson Akuamoah Asiedu from acting as Auditor General.
This was after the court had granted Deputy Attorney General Godfred Yeboah Dame’s request to have Mr Asiedu and Auditor-General Daniel Domelovo struck out as defendants in the case.
This is the matter filed by CDD fellow in Public Law and Justice, Prof. Stephen Asare.
The Office of the President on July 4 extended the leave period of the Auditor-General, Daniel Domelevo from 123 days to 167 effective July 1, 2020.
This came in the wake of concerns raised by Mr. Domelovo over the directive to take his accumulated leave because his work, according to him, is embarrassing the government.
READ ALSO:
A letter by Mr. Domelevo dated July 3, 2020, outlined a series of reasons why he believes the directive leaves much to be desired including what he described as “bad faith on the part of the Presidency.”
Prof Asare’s case
Prof. Asare is one of key legal analysts who called out the move by the Presidency, describing it as unconstitutional.
He argued that the office of the Auditor-General was a very important position that should not be toyed with.
He maintains annual leave is by nature voluntary.
He also explains that it is a right earned by an employee that should not be available to the appointing authority to be deployed as a sanction to exercise disciplinary control.
AG’s Office calls for round 1
Even before the case is determined, Prof. Asare filed for an injunction seeking to restrain Mr. Akuamoah Asiedu from performing the functions of Auditor General.
Documents filed in court indicates that the Attorney General’s office holds the view that if the the court grants the request, the work of the office will be greatly affected.
The office says the request personalizes the performance of the functions of the office.
The Deputy AG further argues that the act flies in the face of article 297 (h) and (j) of the constitution.
Wednesday’s hearing
When the case was called Wednesday morning, Justices of the Apex court questioned why Mr. Asiedu and the Auditor General have been named as defendants.
They pointed out that the case is challenging the President’s directive and not any action undertaken by the two.
The court, therefore, struck out the two as defendants in the case.
Lawyer for Prof. Asare then withdrew his request for an injunction as the panel once again pointed out that the injunction should have been sought against the Attorney General who’s defending the President’s action and not the victim of the action (Daniel Domelovo) or the beneficiary (Johnson Akuamoah Asiedu).
Mr. Dame has hinted of filing another motion to have the case dismissed on the basis that documents filed by Prof. Asare need verification.
This has to do with the residential address of a private citizen who signed documents on behalf of Prof. Asare.
The address is written as “XXXXXXX”.
The case is being heard by Justices Dotse, Baffoe Bonnie, Appau, Marful-Sau, Amegatcher, Owusu and Lovelace Johnson