The fears of the Ghanaian tax-payer that the state may soon dole out over $5 million from the High Indebted Poor State Coffers (HIPSC) to compensate Alhaji Yusif and two other plaintiffs if the State and two defendants are found liable by the court, over the sensational demolishing of a hotel near Airport two years ago, has been evaporated.
This was due to the Fast Track High Court (FTHC), presided over by Justice Agnes Dordzie, ruling yesterday, which struck out the name of the Attorney General as one of the defendants in the case.
The court in its ruling also slapped ?400,000 cost against Alhaji Yussif and the two plaintiffs for joining the Attorney General in the case without legal basis.
The plaintiffs are demanding specific damages of $5million, general damages and cost against the defendants. Now that the Attorney General is out of the case, the burden now solely lies on the two remaining defenders, the Accra Metropolitan Assembly (AMA) and its former Chief Executive, Mr Samuel Adokwei-Addo, to convince the court in the substantive case that they are not liable, and why they should not pay for the demolition of the hotel, which cost over $5 million.
The Attorney General, one of the defenders, had filed a motion praying the court to strike out the A-G from the suit.
Justice Agnes Dordzie after hearing the arguments of both counsel for Alhaji Yusif and a representative from the A-G office adjourned the case for ruling till yesterday.
Counsel for the A-G, Clarence Kuworno, had submitted to the court that the statement of claim filed by the Plaintiff does not disclose a cause of action against the A-G and, therefore, pleaded to the court to strike out the A-G's name from the list of defendants.
He submitted that the plaintiff in their statement of claim knows who specifically carried out the demolition of the hotel.
Kuworno explained that the plaintiff was fully aware that it was the AMA and Samuel Adokwei-Addo who the should be sued without bringing the A-G in the case.
He contended that the AMA was not a state or government ministry , department or agency for the A-G to be added as additional defendants in the case.
Kuwornu had also submitted that by virtue of the Local Government Act 1993 Act (462), AMA was a body corporate with permanent succession and could be sued or be sued on its own without the A-G intervention.
He, therefore, told the court that the presence of the A-G is not required in the legal action against the plaintiff.
Responding, counsel for the plaintiff, Mr. Acquah Simpson, said that the AG motion was grossly misconceived and rather asked the court to dismiss the case.
He told the court that the Ghana Armed Forces actually did the demolition and that the A-G, is legal adviser to the State in all civil proceedings against the state, adding that the AG is a proper party to the action..
He agreed that the AMA was sued in its own capacity and has nothing to do with the A-G.
In a statement of claim, the plaintiff averred that on April 12, 1999 the defendants unlawfully entered onto the land and undertook the exercise of demolion and completely destroyed everything on the land.
The statement stated that the demolition was done by the defendants through the use of the 48 Regiment of the Ghana Armed Forces, using bulldozers and explosives to demolish the hotel.
The court after a three page ruling, upheld the A-G's motion on grounds that the plaintiffs cannot join the A-G in the suit because there is no legal basis for the action.
