Nana Akufo-Addo
Posted on: www.dailyguideghana.com
By William Yaw
Owusu
Wednesday Aril 24, 2013.
Justice
Francis Yaonasu Kpegah took cover yesterday
when a case he initiated against Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, the 2012 New
Patriotic Party (NPP) was called in court.
The
retired Supreme Court Justice was nowhere to be found when the preliminary
objection raised in the case in which he is suing Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo
for impersonation was heard at the Motions Court in Accra.
Nana
Akufo-Addo, was however, present in court and was supported by top-notch team
of lawyers most of whom were nurtured by his respected law firm, Akufo-Addo,
Prempeh and Co.
Daniel
Djentuh, announcing himself as representing Justice Kpegah told the court
presided over by Justice Cecilia Sowah of the Court of Appeal that the retired Supreme
Court justice who is a leading member of the ruling National Democratic
Congress (NDC) legal team had been taken ill suddenly and could not make an
appearance.
Interestingly,
Justice Kpegah who claimed to be indisposed was heard live on radio running his
mouth that he was going to give Nana Akufo-Addo a knockout in the next
adjourned date on May 2.
On
the processes filed, Justice Kpegah who wants a declaration
that Nana Akufo-Addo is “not entitled to practice law in Ghana,” and also wants
the authorities to close down the law firm Akufo-Addo, Prempeh and Co, had
averred that he was going to do his own case.
“He has
suddenly become ill. He fell ill today. It is on health grounds that he is not
here,” Mr. Djentuh, who says he works at Providence Chambers when the judge
demanded his particulars, told the court.
When
the case was called, Godfred Yeboah Dame, representing Nana Akufo-Addo, tried
to move a motion asking the court to strike out Justice
Kpegah’s action as “frivolous, vexatious, an abuse of the court’s process and
disclosing no reasonable cause of action,” Mr. Djentuh raised preliminary objection
saying “we have not filed any affidavit in opposition because they
(respondent/applicant) have not entered any conditional appearance.”
“They are not properly before you,” he argued but
the judge cut in to ask “you are aware that appearance has been entered albeit conditional”
to which Mr. Djentuh replied “they have not entered conditional appearance to
set aside the writ of summons under Order 9 Rule 8.”
The judge then asked Justice Kpegah’s counsel: “where
is your brief? I see that the plaintiff said he was entering the case himself,”
but counsel replied that “He could have been here personally but he was
suddenly taken ill…I am representing him.”
At this moment, counsel requested for a date and Mr.
Yeboah-Dame vehemently protested and the judge said “if you are holding
someone’s brief you take your brief with you…you do not know what will happen.”
Mr. Yeboah-Dame then took the floor and told the
court that they were relying on Order 11 Rule 18 which seeks to set aside
Justice Kpegah’s action.
Counsel
used Justice Kpegah’s own rulings on conditional appearance to make his point
and said “the preliminary objection is totally misconceived.”
The
judge then overruled Justice Kpegah’s preliminary objection and asked Nana
Akufo-Addo’s counsel to move the motion, seeking to strike out the action.
Mr.
Yeboah-Dame said it was appropriate for Justice Kpegah to have regard for the
procedure saying “this process cannot be allowed to fester. The defendant
continues to suffer abuse in the eyes of the public.”
Counsel
argued that it was not worth it for the court to go into full hearing since the
action as
“frivolous, vexatious, an abuse of the court’s process and disclosing no
reasonable cause of action.”
He said Justice Kpegah was in the wrong forum as far
as the application was concerned and added that per the exhibits attached to
the affidavit, the plaintiff has shown no reasonable cause of action.
“We contend that all matters governing legal
practice are spelt out in the Legal Profession Act, Act 32 and the proper forum
the plaintiff needed to go first should have been the General Legal Council
where such matters are addressed before any further action.”
He said Nana Akufo-Addo has attached an exhibit that
shows that he signed the Roll Book in 1975 after he had been admitted to the
Middle Temple Bar in England and that the name William and Nana well clarifies
in the Roll Book.
He said Justice Kpegah’s claim “is just maintainable,”
and asked the court to award punitive cost against the plaintiff.
Reacting, Mr. Djentuh who looked ill-prepared said
the 1992 Constitution mandates the High Court to deal with all matters but he
failed to particularise article(s) or clause(s) to back his case.
He said the signatures signed by Nana Akufo-Addo in
the Roll Book were different but Mr. Yeboah-Dame objected because he said the
plaintiff’s counsel had not filed any affidavit to be able to make those
claims.
The judge then told Justice Kpegah’s counsel that “I
am really surprised that in such a case you come without your brief.”
The court fixed Wednesday, May 2, 2013 as the date
for ruling.
Kpegah
Fires Back
However in a press statement issued last night and
copied to Dr Raymond Atuguba, President Mahama’s Executive Secretary via the
email, Justice Kpegah said Nana Akufo-Addo’s counsel should not have been given
the platform in court yesterday.
Daniel Djentuh represents Justice Kpegah
“Today the
23rd Day of April, a Judicial sacrilege was occasioned when the presiding Judge
at the Fast Track High Court granted audience to Lawyer Godfred Yeboah Dame to
move an ill conceived application to strike out the case in the matter
involving my humble self Justice Francis Yaonasu Kpegah as plaintiff and NANA
ADDO DANKWA AKUFO -ADDO as Defendant, SUIT NO. AP 94/2013.
“The presiding Judge should not have
granted audience to Lawyer Godfred Yeboah Dame since he did not enter
appearance to the writ of summons for and on behalf of the Defendant NANA ADDO
DANKWA AKUFO-ADDO and is therefore not known to the Honourable Court and the
parties to the instant suit. The only way he could have been granted audience
by the Honourable Court is if he had filed a NOTICE OF CHANGE OF SOLICITORS.
“My Search at the Registry of the
Fast Track High Court indicates that there was no Notice of change of
solicitors filed at the Registry of the Fast Track High Court. This was also
confirmed by the Registrar of the Fast Track High Court , Mr Rexford Gyimah.
“I was unable to attend Court today
in person due to ill health. However, I was duly represented by Mr. Djentuh, a
practising Barrister and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of Ghana. Let me put on
record that my not being in Court personally today should not offer any Premature
Sanctuary Of Comfort To The Defendant Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo -Addo. I am still
going to let the whole world know that Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo Addo is
impersonating WAD Akufo-Addo who is number 1190 on the ROLL OF LAWYERS IN GHANA”,
he said in the press statement.
No comments:
Post a Comment