Chief Justice unhappy about CHRAJ's allegations
Gilbert Boyefio
16/01/09
The Chief Justice, Her Ladyship Justice Georgina Theodora Wood, has taken comments on allegations of bribery and corruption leveled against the judiciary by the Acting Commissioner of the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice very seriously. The Judiciary has therefore written to the CHRAJ to come out with proof of the allegations.
In a letter signed by the Judicial Secretary, Justice Alex Poku-Acheampong to the Editor of The Statesman newspaper - which carried a story under the headline, “Supreme Court’s ruling affects complaints of corruption”, and copied to Her Ladyship the Chief Justice, First Deputy Judicial Secretary and the Second Deputy Judicial Secretary – it was stated that the Chief Justice and the Judicial Council had avowed to do everything possible to substantially reduce corruption in the Judicial Service. The letter stated that it was on this premise that the Judiciary invited the CHRAJ to a meeting to discuss the matter.
“This was done on the basis that CHRAJ being the administrative body mandated under Article 218 (a) and (e) of the 1992 Constitution to investigate corruption, could be in possession of facts which we are not privy to and which might have informed the comments made by the Acting Commissioner of CHRAJ,” the letter pointed out.
The letter went on to state that as explained by the Supreme Court in the case of the Republic versus CHRAJ Ex parte Dr Richard Anane, indeed, under Article 218 (e) of the 1992 Constitution, the CHRAJ has the mandate to “investigate all instances of alleged or suspected corruption and the misappropriation of public money by officials and to take appropriate steps, including reports to the Attorney-General and the Auditor-General, resulting from such investigations.”
It indicated, “Unfortunately, we have still not heard from CHRAJ and we have sent them a reminder of our earlier request for a meeting. We are anxiously waiting to meet the Acting Commissioner of CHRAJ to discuss the issues raised by her,” the letter said.
However, a source at the Acting Commissioner’s Office has intimated to this paper that it received the invitation from the judiciary late last year but denied that the Commission had refused to honour it. According to him, “We have been in communication with two or three people at the Judicial Secretary’s Office on the matter, but the problem we are facing now is agreeing on the date to meet since we both have tight schedules.”
Giving highlights of the 2008 report on the State of Human Rights in Ghana at last year’s celebration of International Human Rights Day under the theme, "Dignity and Justice for all of us”, the Acting Commissioner of CHRAJ, Anna Bossman, submitted that the Supreme Court judgment on December 21, 2007, on the mandate of the Commission in the case of The Republic versus CHRAJ: Ex parte Dr Richard Anane, had affected the intake of complaints on conflict of interest and corruption.
To the Acting Commissioner, more disturbing was the issue of judicial corruption. She said allegations of corruption and connivance in perverting the cause and end of justice had been rife, and had generally tended to erode a measure of confidence in the judiciary.
Ms Bossman noted that this year, Ghana scored 3.9 on the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index and was ranked 67 of the 180 countries surveyed. She indicated that that score was what Ghana obtained in 2002.
"Though, a slight improvement over the previous years, the score of 3.9 is far below the average clean score of 5.0; combined with the fact that Ghana has continuously scored between 3.3 and 3.9 since 1999, this year’s score should be a source of worry for Ghanaians requiring special attention than has been,” she pointed out.
16/01/09
The Chief Justice, Her Ladyship Justice Georgina Theodora Wood, has taken comments on allegations of bribery and corruption leveled against the judiciary by the Acting Commissioner of the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice very seriously. The Judiciary has therefore written to the CHRAJ to come out with proof of the allegations.
In a letter signed by the Judicial Secretary, Justice Alex Poku-Acheampong to the Editor of The Statesman newspaper - which carried a story under the headline, “Supreme Court’s ruling affects complaints of corruption”, and copied to Her Ladyship the Chief Justice, First Deputy Judicial Secretary and the Second Deputy Judicial Secretary – it was stated that the Chief Justice and the Judicial Council had avowed to do everything possible to substantially reduce corruption in the Judicial Service. The letter stated that it was on this premise that the Judiciary invited the CHRAJ to a meeting to discuss the matter.
“This was done on the basis that CHRAJ being the administrative body mandated under Article 218 (a) and (e) of the 1992 Constitution to investigate corruption, could be in possession of facts which we are not privy to and which might have informed the comments made by the Acting Commissioner of CHRAJ,” the letter pointed out.
The letter went on to state that as explained by the Supreme Court in the case of the Republic versus CHRAJ Ex parte Dr Richard Anane, indeed, under Article 218 (e) of the 1992 Constitution, the CHRAJ has the mandate to “investigate all instances of alleged or suspected corruption and the misappropriation of public money by officials and to take appropriate steps, including reports to the Attorney-General and the Auditor-General, resulting from such investigations.”
It indicated, “Unfortunately, we have still not heard from CHRAJ and we have sent them a reminder of our earlier request for a meeting. We are anxiously waiting to meet the Acting Commissioner of CHRAJ to discuss the issues raised by her,” the letter said.
However, a source at the Acting Commissioner’s Office has intimated to this paper that it received the invitation from the judiciary late last year but denied that the Commission had refused to honour it. According to him, “We have been in communication with two or three people at the Judicial Secretary’s Office on the matter, but the problem we are facing now is agreeing on the date to meet since we both have tight schedules.”
Giving highlights of the 2008 report on the State of Human Rights in Ghana at last year’s celebration of International Human Rights Day under the theme, "Dignity and Justice for all of us”, the Acting Commissioner of CHRAJ, Anna Bossman, submitted that the Supreme Court judgment on December 21, 2007, on the mandate of the Commission in the case of The Republic versus CHRAJ: Ex parte Dr Richard Anane, had affected the intake of complaints on conflict of interest and corruption.
To the Acting Commissioner, more disturbing was the issue of judicial corruption. She said allegations of corruption and connivance in perverting the cause and end of justice had been rife, and had generally tended to erode a measure of confidence in the judiciary.
Ms Bossman noted that this year, Ghana scored 3.9 on the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index and was ranked 67 of the 180 countries surveyed. She indicated that that score was what Ghana obtained in 2002.
"Though, a slight improvement over the previous years, the score of 3.9 is far below the average clean score of 5.0; combined with the fact that Ghana has continuously scored between 3.3 and 3.9 since 1999, this year’s score should be a source of worry for Ghanaians requiring special attention than has been,” she pointed out.
Comments
Post a Comment