Justice Dery files fresh suit against Tiger Eye

Embattled High Court judge Justice Paul Dery has filed a fresh suit at the Supreme Court seeking to nullify a petition by Tiger Eye PI to President John Mahama.

Tiger Eye PI led by undercover journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas has petitioned the President through the Chief Justice to impeach 32 lower and high court judges over allegations of bribe taking.

So far, 20 of the Magistrate and Circuit Court judges implicated in the scandal have been sacked from office.

Meanwhile, two High Court judges John Ajet-Nasam and Ernest Obimpeh have also been dismissed from the judicial service following their involvement in the judicial scandal.

According to Dery’s new suit, Tiger Eye PI has no locus to file that petition hence it must be declared unconstitutional.

Meanwhile, a five-member Supreme Court Panel chaired by Justice Julius Ansah has by a unanimous decision dismissed Justice Dery's suit which sought to declare as null and void proceedings instituted by the Chief Justice to remove him and several other judges who are alleged to have taken bribes.

The Supreme Court held that even though Tiger Eye PI did violate article 146 clause 8 of the 1992 constitution, it does not mean that the constitutional process to inquire into the petition should be declared null and void.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court granted him three of his reliefs which were:

1) A declaration that the 1st Defendant’s publication of its Petition to the President in the media contravened Article 146 (8) of the 1992 Constitution and therefore unconstitutional.

2) A declaration that the conduct of the 1st Defendant acting through its Chief Executive Officer and Acting Editor of the Crusading Guide Newspaper, Anas Aremeyaw Anas in releasing the contents of the Petition, through publications in the Crusading Guide Newspaper, his personal Facebook page, public screening of the audio visual recordings in support of the Petition at the Accra International Conference Centre on the 22nd of September, 2015, containing the evidence in support of the Petition, is in violation of Article 146(8) of the 1992 Constitution and therefore unconstitutional.

3) A declaration that the 2nd Defendant acting through the Judicial Secretary’s Press Release dated 11th September, 2015, naming the Plaintiff as one of the twelve (12) High Court Judges involved in the “Bribery Scandal” is in contravention of Article 146 (8) of the 1992 Constitution and therefore unconstitutional.

The embattled High court judge and several other judges were captured in a video allegedly taking monies to decide on cases before them by investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas and his Tiger Eye firm.