Tony Lithur, Counsel for Nana Konadu Agyemeng Rawlings, Sherry Aryetey and Carridem, has accused the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Joe Ghartey of manipulating the legal system by using the coercive powers of the court against his clients.
Mr Lithur made this accusation at a Fast Track High Court in Accra last week after moving an application of notice for an order of stay of proceeding against his client until determination of a civil suit, brought by them against the A-G.
The application also seeks for an order from the court to strike out the criminal charges against his clients. He pointed out that the AG is a public officer who the Constitution has granted a lot of powers to instigate cases which also requires that he exercise discretionary powers. He however noted that the AG role as a member of the Executive can influence the exercise of his discretional powers.
Mr Lithur pointed out that in a situation whereby the discretionary powers of the AG is doubted it must be subjected to judicial review.
"Where the AG's exercise of discretional powers shows bad faith, or unfair interference it should be subjected to a judicial review,” he told the court. He said the court has the powers to review any act by the AG in instituting the criminal case against his clients.
He argued that the AG in doing that whilst the civil suit is pending was trying to influence the civil proceedings which he is a party to. He said it is their stand that by taking this line on action the AG acted in bad faith and manipulatively.
He wondered why the AG could not pursue the civil case to its end but rather commencing criminal proceedings on the same issue. Konadu’s lawyer was of the view that the AG’s action will result into a conflict of judgment should the civil case go in their favour and the criminal in that of the prosecution. He said the AG in commencing the criminal proceedings by using the coercive powers of the court, abused his office because he is a party in the civil case.
Mr Lithur observed that initial attempt by them to apply for stay of proceedings was frustrated and made useless by t he AG when the prosecution totally amended the charges. He noted that this was not the first time the prosecution decided to change the charges against their clients. He said the first time the prosecution change the charges, they only came back to inform the court that they are ready to proceed with the old charges because of public vilifications. He said the whole idea was to undermine their application for stay. He also accused the police and the AG of persistent harassment of workers at the cannery, adding “the clear motive of the AG is to take away the Nsawam cannery by any fair or foul means.”
He noted that if the AG had allowed the civil case to proceed and he wins there will not be the need to commence a criminal case. He said it will be prudent for the court to stay proceedings in the criminal case to allow the outcome of the civil case. “If after the civil hearing there is any need for criminal actions to be taken then the AG can institute criminal proceedings,” he added.
Mr Lithur pointed out to the court that there are faults with even the new charges. He explained that the charges of forging and authorizing false document and the particulars advance in support of them cannot in law constitute an offence.
He argued that the correspondence which was the basis of the said charges was between Carridem and the DIC. He said Carridem is not complaining about it and therefore why should the AG.
