RESPONSE FROM THE OFFICE OF ALFRED AGBESI WOYOME
ON THE MISREPORTAGE BY JOURNALISTS ON SUPREME COURT PROCEEDINGS DATED TUESDAY, 21ST NOVEMBER, 2017.
There has been a lot of misrepresentation and misreportage by the Ghanaian media concerning the case involving:
Martin Alamisi Amidu } Plaintiff
1. Attorney General } 1st Defendant
2. Watervile Holdings (BVI) Limited } 2nd Defendant
3. Alfred Agbesi Woyome } 3rd Defendant
case number J8/05/18, which was empanelled by 5 justices of the Supreme Court and has been slated on Tuesday, 28th November for a ruling on it.
The case is not about the oral examination of Alfred Agbesi Woyome. This case is to determine the impact and import of Article 40 & 75 of the 1992 Ghana constitution, particularly articles 40 (c) and 40 (d), especially 40 (d) (ii) on Ghana’s international obligation and conduct, particularly on the case between Alfred Agbesi Woyome and the Republic of Ghana at the African Human & People’s Right in Arusha, Tanzania.
For emphasis, we reproduce them below:
40(c) promote respect for international law, treaty obligation and the settlement of international disputes by peaceful means.
40(d) adhere to the principles enshrined in or as the case may be, the aims and ideals of:
i. the Charter of the United Nations;
ii. the Charter of the Organisation of African Unity;
iii. the Commonwealth;
iv. the treaty of Economic Community of West African States; and
v. any other international organisation of which Ghana is a member.
In article 40 it states, “In its dealing with other nations, the government SHALL”, emphasis is on “SHALL”.
Article 75 of the constitution states as reproduced below:
75(1) The President may execute or cause to be executed treaties, agreements or conventions in the name of Ghana.
75(2) A treaty, agreement or conventions executed by or under the authority of the President shall be subject to ratification by:
(a) Act of Parliament, or
(b) a resolution of Parliament supported by the votes of more than one half of all members of Parliament.
In a recent case before the Supreme Court on the GITMO 3, the Supreme Court stated, which has become law that a president of the country can sign an agreement that has been ratified by parliament in accordance with article 75 and it becomes binding on the state. Article 40 states, “GOVERNMENT”, which consists of:
Article 88 of the constitution, particularly (1) (5) (6) makes the Attorney General the representative of the Government under article 40 of the 1992 constitution of Ghana.
In this case of J8/05/18, the Attorney General of the Republic of Ghana is participating fully in the main case of the interim measures before the African Court of Human & People’s Rights, and turns around executing the judgement of the Supreme Court, which is a subject matter before the African Court of Human & People’s Rights in clear violation of the constitution of Ghana as quoted above.
The Attorney General ought to have stayed all processes before the Courts in Ghana having been served by the African Court of Human & People’s Right through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and all African Countries that are signatories to the protocol establishing the African Court of Human & People’s Rights, the African Human Rights Commission, etc.
Also, the Attorney General has been notified of the processes of the case before the African Court of Human & People’s Right.
The case before the 5 Supreme Court Judges is not about the independence of the Judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court of Ghana, which is also protected by another article of the 1992 constitution.
This issue is not about Alfred Agbesi Woyome, but the respect and protection of the constitution, and the sanctity of the age long tradition of the Ghanaian law.
By a combination of articles 40 and 75, Ghana being a signatory to the protocol to the African Charter on Human & People’s Rights on the establishment of an African Court on Human & People’s Rights, which Ghana ratified in its parliament on 25th August, 2004 and deposited on 6th August 2005, the state of Ghana represented by the Attorney General are bound by procedures of the African Court of Human & People’s Right, and cannot be allowed to wantonly flout same.
In addition, Ghana on the 9th of February, 2011 signed to accept the competence of the African Court of Human & People Rights in accordance with article 34 (6) to receive cases brought against Ghana by individuals and deposited same on 10th March, 2011.
The Republic or State of Ghana, represented by the Attorney General, is constitutionally bound by the express provisions of the 1992 constitution of Ghana to observe all such foreign or international protocols, charters and treaties.
What is being asked by Alfred Agbesi Woyome is to stay all the processes before the Supreme Court by the dictate of the constitution until the final determination of the case before the African Court of Human & People’s Rights.
The case that is supposed to stop the oral examination is case number J7/1/18, which has not been empanelled yet, and on that basis the oral examination has been adjourned sinedine.
Signed by Seth Reginald Dogbey
Spokesperson for Alfred Agbesi Woyome