THE Accra High Court before which squatters at Sodom and Gomorrah in Accra have filed a suit seeking an injunction to restrain the Accra Metropolitan Assembly (AMA) from carrying out its intended plan to evict them from the area, has adjourned the case to June 24.
This followed a request by the Attorney-General?s Department to be given time to respond to the notice served it in respect of the case. The department told the court, presided over by Mr Justice Yaw Apau, that it has been short-served. The Centre for Public Interest Law (CEPIL), a legal aid and human rights non-governmental organisation, filed the suit on behalf of the squatters about three weeks ago.
The plaintiffs are also seeking an order that the defendants resettle or relocate the people of Sodom and Gomorrah.
In their statement of claim, 11 plaintiffs declared that the intended action of the AMA will violate their fundamental human rights under the Constitution. They are Issah Iddi Abass, Mahama Liro Maligu-Naa, Aisha Alhassan, Thomas Yaw Asare, Ramatu Mohammed, Efo Appiah and Esi Jabar.
The rest are Charles Kojo, Isiffu Mohammed, Sammy Cudjoe and Abdulai Wumbei. The plaintiffs said that they have settled and have been occupying the land along the bank of the Korle Lagoon, referred to as Sodom and Gomorrah, since 1994.
They contended that the Korle Lagoon Ecological Restoration Project (KLERP) is a Government of Ghana project being implemented by the Ministry of Works and Housing and the Accra Metropolitan Assembly and funded by the Kuwaiti Fund for Arab Economic Development, the Arab Bank for International Economic Development in Africa and the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) Fund for International Development.
The plaintiffs maintained that further to the commencement of the project and as required by law, an environmental and social assessment statement of the project was prepared as a prerequisite for the grant of a permit by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to commence work.
On the environmental and social impact assessment, the plaintiffs said mitigation and enhancement measures have been proposed and that the measures proposed, among others, include the resettlement or relocation of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah.
The plaintiffs also said that the defendants have not complied with the said social impact assessment and have failed or refused to resettle or relocate the people of Sodom and Gomorrah.
The plaintiffs averred further that having failed to comply with the social impact assessment, the defendants held a press conference on May 28, 2002, giving the people of Sodom and Gomorrah a two-week ultimatum to vacate the area. This, the plaintiffs said, will violate their right to human dignity, social and economic dignity and also their right to the due process of the law in respect of governmental conduct that impact directly on their lives.
The plaintiffs said further that the defendant, having failed to relocate or settle them in accordance with the social impact assessment of the project, great hardship will be caused them if the defendant is not restrained from carrying out the intended ejection.
