<\/p>\n
The Director of Communication for the National Democratic Congress (NDC) Kakra Essamuah has berated President Akufo-Addo for criticizing former President Mahama over his recent comments on the country\u2019s judiciary.<\/span><\/p>\n According to Mr Essamuah, who is also a Lawyer, the President lacks the moral right to criticize anyone for speaking against judges in the country, especially when he, Akufo-Addo, was at the forefront of a month-long boycott of the courts in 1995.<\/span><\/p>\n He buttressed his assertions with the following statement while speaking to Accra-based Class FM.<\/span><\/p>\n “I’m very disturbed at the turn of events in Ghana at the moment. I’m a Lawyer, let me tell you a special story, in 1995, I was counsel, Junior Counsel to Mr B. J Da Rocha in a case in which the republic, led by the Deputy Attorney General Martin Amidu, prosecuted a lawyer for contempt of court.<\/span><\/p>\n “The Supreme Court convicted a lawyer called Kwabena Mensah Bonsu, he’s still alive, if you like, go and ask him. He was convicted for contempt and jailed for one month at Nsawam Prisons.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cDo you know what happened in Ghana? Lawyers in Ghana boycotted all courts for one month because of that judgement\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n “At that material time, the president of the Greater Accra regional branch of the Ghana Bar Association was Akufo-Addo, who is now president. Now, what is he talking about\u201d?<\/span><\/p>\n President Akufo-Addo while speaking at the Ghana Bar Association conference in Ho, President criticized the former president for taking on the judiciary<\/span><\/p>\n He went further to say that the former president made those comments for \u201cselfish parochial partisan reasons”.<\/span><\/p>\n “These are the plaintiffs who go court, indeed the highest Court of the land, provide the skimpiest of evidence to back their claims and yet insist that claims be upheld despite the elementary violation of the ancient common law rules for the discharge of the burden of proof that such a result would entail. It is also no wonder that their claims were unanimously dismissed 7-0 by the apex court.<\/span><\/p>\n “The result of this case is indeed in sharp contrast to the result of a similar one in 2013 when the unsuccessful plaintiffs managed to persuade four out of a nine-member court to fight for them and yet the earlier plaintiffs chose not to wage a political war against the courts”, he said.<\/span><\/p>\n Content created and supplied by: OEntertainment (via Opera \n , . , . () , , , , , , , , . \/ , and\/or . , , and\/or , and\/or <\/span>
\nNews )<\/p>\n<\/article>\n
\n<\/span>\n<\/p>\n