LAWSUIT AGAINST GHANA BAR ASSOCIATION
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAST TRACK DIVISION
ACCRA
Suit No.
JOE ABOAGYE DEBRAH ]
F119B, Ashongman ]
Accra ] PLAINTIFF
VRS.
GHANA BAR ASSOCIATION ]
Hse. No. 5, 2 Ave. State House Rd.}
South-East Ridge, Accra } DEFENDANT
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
1. The Plaintiff is a lawyer based in Accra and a member of the Defendant Association.
2. The Defendant is an association with the object of concerning itself, inter alia with all matters affecting the legal profession in Ghana and is open to every lawyer enrolled as such in Ghana, subject to application and the payment of relevant fees.
3.The Defendant is governed by a Constitution duly passed into force on October 1, 1994.
4. The Plaintiff says that by the Defendant’s Constitution, an Annual General Conference took place in Kumasi from September 29, 2008 to October 2, 2008.
5. The Plaintiff avers that the agenda for the said Annual General Conference was distributed to all members at the said conference and included the election of national officers for the 2008/2009 legal year which was to be held on October 1, 2008.
6. The Plaintiff says that on the due date, the Conference was informed that due to non-compliance with relevant provisions of the Constitution, the elections had been cancelled.
7. The Plaintiff says that the Conference was informed that the Defendant did not comply with the period for opening of nominations and therefore all pending nominations for national executive office were accordingly null and void.
8. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant duly received all relevant nomination documentation from prospective candidates well before the Conference date but did not at any stage of the Conference communicate the alleged non-compliance with the Constitution until the third day of the Conference when the matter was due for discussion.
9. The Plaintiff says that the announcement followed in the wake of controversy at the Conference following the resignation of the then President and the fact that he remained the only candidate for the position of National President if the elections were to take place as originally scheduled.
10. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant’s actions surprised some of the candidates as they claimed they had met all the requirements for the elections.
11. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant admitted openly at the Conference that the error was not due to the prospective candidates but due to the Defendant’s own errors.
12. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant further announced at the Conference that nominations for national executive positions will be opened after the Conference and that all eligible members could file to contest for executive positions before the elections on November 15, 2008.
13. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant adjourned the Conference to November 15, 2008 at the same venue.
14. The Plaintiff says that on November 15, 2008, he raised the unconstitutionality of the proposed elections at the Conference but was defeated in a motion and the Conference voted to proceed with the elections as scheduled.
15. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant went through a process of elections and duly announced that the positions of national officers except that of the National President had been duly filled through the said elections.
16. The Plaintiff avers that the elections for national officers held on November 15, 2008 flies in the face of clear unambiguous provisions in Article 26(3) of the Defendant’s Constitution and are therefore null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever.
17. The Plaintiff says that the said elected national officers necessarily filed their nomination forms between October 2, 2008 and November 15, 2008 when nominations were opened after the first Conference ended on October 2, 2008.
18. The Plaintiff says that the General Council of the Defendant which is the governing body, has powers under the Constitution to appoint officers to fill casual vacancies but chose to act unconstitutionally through elections to fill the said positions.
19. The Plaintiff says that the so-called elected officers have begun acting as such and would not halt their actions unless through the injunctive powers of this Honourable Court.
20. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant must comply with its own Constitution in order to retain its high position in the eyes of the Ghanaian public as the voice and beacon of legality and constitutionalism in national affairs.
21. Wherefore the Plaintiff claims as per the indorsement to his writ of summons in the following terms:
a. A declaration that the election of national officers of the Defendant on November 15, 2008 is in contravention of Article 26(3) of the Defendant’s Constitution and is therefore null and void and of no legal effect.
b. An order that the election of all national officers of the Defendant at the November 15, 2008 Conference is null and void.
c. An injunction against the Defendant restraining them from permitting, allowing, condoning or parading the said elected officials in any manner whatsoever and/or holding them out as elected national officers of the Defendant for the 2008/2009 legal year or acting as such pending the final determination of the suit.
DATED AT 1ST LAW, ACCRA THIS 18th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2008
PLAINTIFF
THE REGISTRAR
HIGH COURT, FAST TRACK DIVISION
ACCRA
AND TO:
THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAST TRACK DIVISION
ACCRA
Suit No.
JOE ABOAGYE DEBRAH ]
F119B, Ashongman ]
Accra ] PLAINTIFF
VRS.
GHANA BAR ASSOCIATION ]
Hse. No. 5, 2 Ave. State House Rd.}
South-East Ridge, Accra } DEFENDANT
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
1. The Plaintiff is a lawyer based in Accra and a member of the Defendant Association.
2. The Defendant is an association with the object of concerning itself, inter alia with all matters affecting the legal profession in Ghana and is open to every lawyer enrolled as such in Ghana, subject to application and the payment of relevant fees.
3.The Defendant is governed by a Constitution duly passed into force on October 1, 1994.
4. The Plaintiff says that by the Defendant’s Constitution, an Annual General Conference took place in Kumasi from September 29, 2008 to October 2, 2008.
5. The Plaintiff avers that the agenda for the said Annual General Conference was distributed to all members at the said conference and included the election of national officers for the 2008/2009 legal year which was to be held on October 1, 2008.
6. The Plaintiff says that on the due date, the Conference was informed that due to non-compliance with relevant provisions of the Constitution, the elections had been cancelled.
7. The Plaintiff says that the Conference was informed that the Defendant did not comply with the period for opening of nominations and therefore all pending nominations for national executive office were accordingly null and void.
8. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant duly received all relevant nomination documentation from prospective candidates well before the Conference date but did not at any stage of the Conference communicate the alleged non-compliance with the Constitution until the third day of the Conference when the matter was due for discussion.
9. The Plaintiff says that the announcement followed in the wake of controversy at the Conference following the resignation of the then President and the fact that he remained the only candidate for the position of National President if the elections were to take place as originally scheduled.
10. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant’s actions surprised some of the candidates as they claimed they had met all the requirements for the elections.
11. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant admitted openly at the Conference that the error was not due to the prospective candidates but due to the Defendant’s own errors.
12. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant further announced at the Conference that nominations for national executive positions will be opened after the Conference and that all eligible members could file to contest for executive positions before the elections on November 15, 2008.
13. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant adjourned the Conference to November 15, 2008 at the same venue.
14. The Plaintiff says that on November 15, 2008, he raised the unconstitutionality of the proposed elections at the Conference but was defeated in a motion and the Conference voted to proceed with the elections as scheduled.
15. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant went through a process of elections and duly announced that the positions of national officers except that of the National President had been duly filled through the said elections.
16. The Plaintiff avers that the elections for national officers held on November 15, 2008 flies in the face of clear unambiguous provisions in Article 26(3) of the Defendant’s Constitution and are therefore null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever.
17. The Plaintiff says that the said elected national officers necessarily filed their nomination forms between October 2, 2008 and November 15, 2008 when nominations were opened after the first Conference ended on October 2, 2008.
18. The Plaintiff says that the General Council of the Defendant which is the governing body, has powers under the Constitution to appoint officers to fill casual vacancies but chose to act unconstitutionally through elections to fill the said positions.
19. The Plaintiff says that the so-called elected officers have begun acting as such and would not halt their actions unless through the injunctive powers of this Honourable Court.
20. The Plaintiff says that the Defendant must comply with its own Constitution in order to retain its high position in the eyes of the Ghanaian public as the voice and beacon of legality and constitutionalism in national affairs.
21. Wherefore the Plaintiff claims as per the indorsement to his writ of summons in the following terms:
a. A declaration that the election of national officers of the Defendant on November 15, 2008 is in contravention of Article 26(3) of the Defendant’s Constitution and is therefore null and void and of no legal effect.
b. An order that the election of all national officers of the Defendant at the November 15, 2008 Conference is null and void.
c. An injunction against the Defendant restraining them from permitting, allowing, condoning or parading the said elected officials in any manner whatsoever and/or holding them out as elected national officers of the Defendant for the 2008/2009 legal year or acting as such pending the final determination of the suit.
DATED AT 1ST LAW, ACCRA THIS 18th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2008
PLAINTIFF
THE REGISTRAR
HIGH COURT, FAST TRACK DIVISION
ACCRA
AND TO:
THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT
posted by JOEDEE at 1:54 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home