Mr Ackumey has four lawyers referred to the General Legal Council by the Judges and Magistrates’ Association to go substantiate their allegations of bribery against the judiciary, have a point albeit a minor one.
He said suppose the four lawyers are able to prove their case and are given deserving commendation, it would appear then that the Supreme Court erred in not hearing the case because of Dr Atuguba’s involvement in it.
But Kweku Baako disagreed.
He argued that given Dr Atuguba’s own statement that “I have done several cases where the client will tell me, ‘lawyer let’s go and see the judge’ and when I say no then they are surprised and I’m almost certain that some of them went behind me and saw the judges because of what happened in court afterwards and the fact that they never mentioned the issue again after I said no. They just silently went back, paid the bribe and then you realise suddenly as the lawyer that the case is moving very fast and in the end you win…,” there was no way the judges could possibly sit on a case involving the same lawyer who had not yet substantiated these allegations against members of the Bench.
Another panelist, Communications Minister, Haruna Iddrisu, who is also a lawyer by training, was rather taciturn, except to restate the legal maxim that “he who averts must prove.”
“I say that I have a difficulty commenting further until I have some substantial lead. My worry is that the judiciary should not use their power to stampede the process in persons raising questions about whether or not individual persons within them have committed some wrongs or not,” he said.
Story by Malik Abass Daabu/Myjoyonline.com/Ghana
Excerpt from: