Anane drags CHRAJ to court
Gilbert Boyefio
19/12/2006
The long awaited threat of seeking redress at the law courts by Dr Richard Anane, former Minister for Road Transport and MP for Nhyiaeso finally came to pass yesterday when he dragged the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice, which had recommended in a report that he be fired, before a Fast Track High Court in Accra.
Dr Anane was not in court.
CHRAJ on September 16, 2006 found Richard Anane, guilty of abuse of power and of conflict of interest in its investigation following allegations in The Chronicle, and The Daily Graphic against him.
He was however found innocent of corruption.
The Commission recommended that Dr Anane, Minister for Road Transport, be removed from office for committing perjury by misleading a CHRAJ panel whilst under oath that he had remitted $30,000 to his mistress, while in a prior testimony before a Parliamentary Select Committee during his vetting as Minister of Road Transport in 2005, he told members that he had only remitted $10,000.
CHRAJ also recommended that Dr Anane apologise to Parliament for misleading it, and to the President and people of Ghana.
The Acting Commissioner of CHRAJ, Anna Bossman said the decision was made pursuant to Section 7 and 18 of the Act establishing and governing the Commission's acts. Specifically, the Commission set out to look into allegations of corruption, conflict of interest and the abuse of power levelled against the Minister.
When the case was called, Counsel for Dr Anane, Acquah Sampson, appealed for extension of time to properly file their statement of case, which constitutionally should have been done 14 days after their notice of application, in September 22, 2006.
He told the court that the substantive case is an application for a judicial review of the decision of CHRAJ, which was delivered on September 16, 2006, in reflection to an investigation that was conducted into the affairs of Dr Anane.
Counsel for CHRAJ, Dede Tukuu with Isaac Anann, holding brief for P E Bondzi- Simpson, pleaded for a cost of ˘10 million to be awarded against Dr Anane.
The judge however awarded costs of ˘5 million against Dr Anane, but granted their application for extension of time. He advised counsel to file their statement of case within seven days for the matter to be argued on its merit.
19/12/2006
The long awaited threat of seeking redress at the law courts by Dr Richard Anane, former Minister for Road Transport and MP for Nhyiaeso finally came to pass yesterday when he dragged the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice, which had recommended in a report that he be fired, before a Fast Track High Court in Accra.
Dr Anane was not in court.
CHRAJ on September 16, 2006 found Richard Anane, guilty of abuse of power and of conflict of interest in its investigation following allegations in The Chronicle, and The Daily Graphic against him.
He was however found innocent of corruption.
The Commission recommended that Dr Anane, Minister for Road Transport, be removed from office for committing perjury by misleading a CHRAJ panel whilst under oath that he had remitted $30,000 to his mistress, while in a prior testimony before a Parliamentary Select Committee during his vetting as Minister of Road Transport in 2005, he told members that he had only remitted $10,000.
CHRAJ also recommended that Dr Anane apologise to Parliament for misleading it, and to the President and people of Ghana.
The Acting Commissioner of CHRAJ, Anna Bossman said the decision was made pursuant to Section 7 and 18 of the Act establishing and governing the Commission's acts. Specifically, the Commission set out to look into allegations of corruption, conflict of interest and the abuse of power levelled against the Minister.
When the case was called, Counsel for Dr Anane, Acquah Sampson, appealed for extension of time to properly file their statement of case, which constitutionally should have been done 14 days after their notice of application, in September 22, 2006.
He told the court that the substantive case is an application for a judicial review of the decision of CHRAJ, which was delivered on September 16, 2006, in reflection to an investigation that was conducted into the affairs of Dr Anane.
Counsel for CHRAJ, Dede Tukuu with Isaac Anann, holding brief for P E Bondzi- Simpson, pleaded for a cost of ˘10 million to be awarded against Dr Anane.
The judge however awarded costs of ˘5 million against Dr Anane, but granted their application for extension of time. He advised counsel to file their statement of case within seven days for the matter to be argued on its merit.
Comments
Post a Comment