A seven-member panel of the Supreme Court presided over by Chief Justice Anin Yeboah will today deliver judgement in the suit against the Finance Minister, Ken Ofori Atta, on the issuance of a $2.25 billion bond.
This was after the apex court had earlier refused an application from the Commission of Human Rights and Administrative Justice seeking leave to amend their statement of the case.
The judgement fixed for April 22, 2020, was adjourned to today by the panel for its decision.
The panel includes Justice Jones Dotse, Justice Sule Gbadegbe, Justice Baffoe-Bonnie, Justice Yaw Appau, Justice Gabriel Pwamang, Justice Samuel Marfo-Sau and Justice Prof Nii Ashie Kotey.
The Dynamic Youth Movement of Ghana (DYMOG) dragged the Finance Minister, CHRAJ and Attorney General to the Supreme Court over CHRAJ’s investigations into the $2.25 billion bond issuance in March 2017.
The movement is demanding interpretation of Articles 284, 286 and six other reliefs.
“A declaration that by going beyond investigations to make a?pronouncement (of guilt or otherwise) on the 1st Defendant in respect of the allegation of breach of conflict of interest, the 2nd Defendant has contravened Article 287 of the 1992 Constitution.
The movement is also seeking “A declaration that by interpreting Article 284 of the 1992 Constitution (as disclosed between paragraph 3 of page 127 and paragraph 3 of page 133 of the Report), the 2nd Defendant has contravened Article 130(1)(a) of the 1992 Constitution.
“… A consequential order that the content of the report as specified in reliefs (a) and (b) above be expunged from the Report.
DYMOG is also asking “A declaration that the failure of the 1st Defendant to declare his shareholding interests in Data Bank Financial Services Limited, Data Bank Brokerage Limited and Data Bank Financial Holdings Limited to the Auditor-General before taking office as Minister of Finance, as found by the 2nd Defendant on page 120 of the Report, contravenes Article 286(1)(a) of the 1992 Constitution.
He is seeking further “declaration that the occupation by the 1st Defendant of the office of a director in Ventures and Acquisition Limited, a private company, while in office as the Minister responsible for finance without the due permission of the Right Honourable Speaker of Parliament on the grounds stated by the law, contravenes Articles 78(3) of the 1992 Constitution.