Lawyers’ judicial corruption claims irresponsible – Kulendi

A senior legal practitioner, Yoni Kulendi has described as “irrational, illegitimate and illogical”, claims of endemic corruption leveled against Ghana’s magistrates and judges by four lawyers.

The four, Dr. Raymond Atuguba, Executive Secretary of the Constitutional Review Commission; Mr. Larry Bimi, Chairman of the National Commission on Civic Education; Mr David Annan, a member of the NDC legal committee; and Mr Abraham Amaliba, accused the judiciary of dispensing justice based on the quality of the bribe offered.

The Association of Magistrates and Judges of Ghana (AMAJ) has since petitioned the General Legal Council to demand that the said lawyers produce evidence to back up their claims of face the necessary sanctions. They also threatened to recuse themselves from any case being handled by the four. An Accra High Court judge has since carried out the threat, refusing to sit on a suit being pled by Dr Raymond Atuguba until the successful resolution of the AMAJ petition.

Mr Kulendi, whose case has been affected by the May 19 decision of the High Court Judge, said although there are a few bad nuts within the judiciary, painting all of them with a broad brush of corruption “is unfair to the honest, decent hard working ones”.

The damage caused by the comments of these four lawyers would have been minimal if they had used the word ‘some’ in their sweeping comments, he added.

“If you listen to my brother Raymond’s comments, even though he starts with a generalization, he then ends at using the word ‘some’ but unfortunately for him by the time he said that he had so amply made the general statements that it swallowed his small qualification”.

Speaking on Joy FM’s Morning Show programme on Friday May 20, Yoni Kulendi debunked assertions that he has joined in condemning the four lawyers because he was the legal counsel in case being handled by Dr. Raymond Atuguba, insisting such assertions “would be most unfortunate, ridiculous and laughable”, and pointing out his client could always look for another lawyer to continue the case.

Asked if the comments would have made a similar impact if they had been made by a non-lawyer, Yoni Kulendi argued that “for a lawyer to make the comments, it gives it greater gravity than if it came from a man on the street. It’s not the same as anybody on the street. This one is like a fish out of water saying that crocodile is the king of the ocean”.

Mr. Kulendi however advised: “We can turn this into a positive and progressive development; we can also make it negative and adverse to development. It would be adverse if we, for want of a better expression bastardise the discourse and discredit the processes. …after all some of the proponents say we have evidence, let them take the evidence, that evidence would help the judicial service and the disciplinary committee to deal with the specifics. If we do not, then what legacy are we creating?

“On the other hand, if the proponents, those who made the statements come to the conclusion that ‘I think I was speaking in a context where I did not properly choose my words but on a totality I am speaking to the general perception’, they eat humble pie then we move on. But then we all have a collective responsibility as lawyers, litigants, researchers and all of that to help the administration”.

Source: Citifmonline.com