General News of Friday, 29 September 2017
Source: citifmonline.com
2017-09-29
Ashok Kumar Sivaram, Indian businessman with others after the court session
An Accra High Court has dismissed an application praying it for a stay of execution of an earlier judgment ordering the Immigration Service to restore the work and residence visa of Indian businessman, Ashok Kumar Sivaram.
The presiding judge, Justice Naa Adoley Azu explained that her decision was to prevent Mr. Ashok from being at the mercy of the Immigration Service while dealing with his court issues in Ghana.
She also dismissed the Attorney General’s argument that the non granting of the stay application will amount to an interference of the work of the Immigration service as statutory bodies are not above the law.
Justice Azu also questioned the argument by the Attorney General to the effect that security of the nation would be at stake if the stay of execution was not granted.
The Attorney General represented by Jasmine Armah arguing the application told the court that if the stay is not granted it will serve as a precedence for others to use the court to get legally revoked permits overturned.
She added that the restoration order will also be a direct interference with the work of the Immigration Service.
On his part lawyer for the businessman, Gary Nimako objected to the application arguing that the Attorney General has not demonstrated in any way the irreparable damage it would have to deal with if the stay was not granted as per law.
The High Court last week ordered the Immigration service to restore the work and residence permit of Mr. Sivaram within seven days after months of failing to do so, despite a decision quashing Mr. Ashok’s deportation.
Argument for adjournment
The Attorney General representative, Jasmine Armah before going ahead to move her application on Friday prayed for an adjournment of the case because she had not seen and read the affidavit in opposition filed by the respondents and served on her office on the 28th of September.
She also told the court she needed instructions from the AG before responding to the affidavits
Her prayer was objected to by the opposing lawyer who indicated that the application was incompetent hence the move by the Attorney General.
He later withdrew his affidavit forcing the Attorney General to go ahead with the case.
