Wednesday, November 06, 2013

BIG FIGHT OVER F'EDEN CHURCH

Posted on: www.dailyguideghana.com
By William Yaw Owusu
Tuesday, November 5, 2013

MEMBERS OF F’eden Mission Church are at each other’s throat over the alleged change of the name of the church by some of the leading members.

The church’s name was changed to Eden Revival Church International but some of the members are claiming that some few elders initiated and completed the name-changing process without recourse to church members.

As a result, five plaintiffs including the Registered Trustees of F’eden Mission Church had filed a suit at an Accra High Court challenging the action taken by Nana Agyekum Dwamena (1st defendant), Daniel Appiah Koranteng (2nd defendant) and the Trustees of Eden Revival Church International (3rd defendant).

The other plaintiffs are Mrs Susan Anquandah, Isaac Ohene, Benjamin Kusi and Kofi Poku.

F’eden Mission Church, whose headquarters is situated at Kokomlemle, Accra has branches and schools in some parts of the country.

They are seeking reliefs including an order of injunction restraining Nana Dwamena and Mr Koranteng from holding themselves as officers of Registered Trustees of F’eden Mission Church.

They want a declaration that “all properties, movable or immovable held, registered and operated in the name of Eden Revival Church International are the properties of 1st plaintiff and same are held in trust by defendants for the 1st plaintiff.”

The plaintiffs further want recovery of possession together with a declaration that Nana Dwamena and Mr Koranteng by registering themselves as members of Eden Revival Church International have ‘secede’ from F’eden Mission Church as well as an order for account in respect of all properties of F’eden Mission Church in the possession of the defendants.

Finally, the plaintiffs want perpetual injunction restraining the defendants and their agents or supporters from entering or dealing with or in any way interfering with everything associated with F’eden Mission Church nationwide.

Plaintiff’s Case
In their statement of claim filed on August 28, 2013, the plaintiffs claimed that until Eden Revival Church International was incorporated on December 23, 2008, Nana Dwamena and Mr Koranteng were the acting General Overseer and General Secretary respectively of F’eden Mission Church.

The plaintiffs averred that sometime in 2002, after the demise of the founder of F’eden Mission Church, the members, trustees and worshippers decided to rename the church to its former Eden Revival Church International.

According to the plaintiffs, the decision to rename F’eden Mission Church was suspended until the conclusion of a merger talks between F’eden Mission Church and Gospel Light Church.

The plaintiffs claimed that it was during the period for merger talks that Nana Dwamena was appointed to the position of Acting General Overseer until somebody was appointed substantively while Mr. Koranteng also occupied the position of General Secretary.

Name Change Process
“Upon deliberation among the National Executive Council, it was resolved that the name of 1st plaintiff be changed from F’eden Mission Church to Eden Revival Church International,” and added that Nana Dwamena and Mr. Koranteng were tasked with “procuring the necessary documentation from the Registrar General’s office for the change to be effected.”

The plaintiffs claimed that Nana Dwamena and Mr. Koranteng later reported back to the National Executive Council and membership of F’eden Mission Church the name change had been done and had been accepted by Registrar of Companies and added that as a result, an official church programme was held to formally inform members of the church about the latest development.

“Using the powers vested in their name in an arbitrary fashion and with utter disregard to the constitution of the church, 1st and 2nd defendants commenced running the operations of 1st plaintiff in a dictatorial manner, claiming same to be theirs.”

According to the plaintiffs, Nana Dwamena and Mr. Koranteng “unilaterally abolished a radio programme” ran by the church, “changed membership several committees and appointed their favourites into various positions in the church which by this day is known as Eden Revival Church International.”

They also claimed that the defendants procured the signature of Mrs Anquandah as a member/trustee in the name change process and also falsely represented to the plaintiffs that the churche’s name had been changed when in actual fact Nana Dwamena and Mr. Koranteng had done the registration alone.

They also claimed the defendants were using F’eden Mission Church assets as assets of Eden Revival Church International and added: “the 1st and 2nd defendants have proceeded with their acts of fraudulent takeover of the assets and membership of 1st plaintiff by using their personal telephone contacts and representing same as official contacts.”

Defendant’s Rebuttal
The defendants have hit back, describing some of the plaintiff’s averments as unfounded in their statement of defence filed on September 18, 2013 and said they will put the plaintiffs to strict proof.

Nana Dwamena and Mr. Koranteng averred among other things that “after the registration of the hitherto unregistered church as Eden Revival Church International, they have not on their own accord or violation appointed any person or group of persons into positions of the registered church.”

“Indeed, after the acceptance and recognition of the name of the church as Eden Revival Church International by the body of the church, the Executive Committee appointed the 2nd (Mrs Anquandah) and 4th (Mr. Kusi) plaintiffs of the church as national officers.”

According to the defendants, Mrs Anquandah and Mr. Kusi perform pastoral duties in addition to offices they hold in the registered church.

They said the character of the registered church had not “changed substantially from hitherto unregistered church and that by administrative operations of the church, 1st and 2nd defendants are not in a position to have overall control of the management of the accounts and assets of the church as if same were individual’s private property.’


No comments: