GITMO 2 SUIT ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY

Posted on: www.dailyguideghana.com

By William Yaw Owusu

Wednesday, April 27, 2016

The Supreme Court has adjourned sine die the case in which two people are suing the government over the importation of two Guantanamo Bay detainees.

The case took a new twist on April 12 when the defendants made up of the Attorney-General and the Minister of the Interior filed a process averring that Ghana actually had an existing agreement with the United States government regarding the two detainees whose presence continues to generate public uproar.

The revelation by the AG was a sharp departure from the government’s widely-held position that the acceptance of the two Al-Qaeda footsoldiers: Mahmud Umar Muhammad Bin Atef, 36 and Khalid Muhammad Salih Al-Dhuby, 34, was purely a “diplomatic arrangement exercised through an executive power by the President.”

Yesterday when the case was called, the Registrar of the Supreme Court announced that the case was being adjourned sine die.

Daily Guide later learnt that one of the judges to handle the case was said to be indisposed for sometime.

Unconstitutional Action

The suit filed by filed by Magaret Bamfo an 86-year old  retired Conference Officer of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Henry Nana Boakye, a student of Ghana School of Law wants the Supreme Court to declare that President John Mahama acted unconstitutionally by accepting the Al-Qaeda terrorists to Ghana.

On page 7 paragragh  3 of the AG’s statement of case filed on March 16, the government said “we admit that there exist an agreement between the two Government, which was reached by the exchange of confidential diplomatic notes otherwise known as Note Verbales.”

Daily Guide has learnt that with the latest u-turn by the government, it is expected that DE MEDEIROS & Associates, lawyers for the applicants would be seeking to request that the said agreement be made available to them for scrutiny.

Proper Interpretation

The plaintiffs are  seeking among other reliefs a declaration that on a true and proper interpretation of Article 75 of the1992 Constitution of Ghana, the President of the Republic of Ghana acted unconstitutional by agreeing to the transfer of Mahmud Umar Muhammad Bin Atef and Khalid Muhammad Salih Al-Dhuby (both profiled terrorist and former detainees of Guantanamo Bay) to the Republic of Ghana without the ratification by an Act of Parliament or a resolution of Parliament supported by the votes of more than one-half of all the members of Parliament.

They are further seeking a declaration that on a true and proper interpretation of Article 58(2) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the President of the Republic of Ghana who is under an obligation to execute and maintain laws of Ghana  breached the Anti-terrorism Act of 2008 (Act 762) and the Immigration Act of 2000 (Act 573), both being laws passed under the 1992 Constitution of Ghana.

Gitmo 2 Arrival

It may be recalled that the Mahama administration early January announced that Ghana would for the next two years host the terrorists who were previously being held at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba by the United States.

The government had stated that Mahmud Umar Muhammad Bin Atef, 36, and Khalid Muhammad Salih Al-Dhuby, 34, are being offered humanitarian assistance in Ghana under a deal signed by the Mahama administration and US authorities.

It has turned that the two detainees are hardcore terrorists who the US is looking for a place to dump them.

According US security report on the two suspects; Mohammed Bin Atef was “a fighter in Usama bin Laden’s former 55th Arab Brigade and he is an admitted member of the Taliban.

He trained at al Farouq, the infamous al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan, “participated in hostilities against US and Coalition forces, and continues to demonstrate his support of Usama Bin Laden and extremism.”

The plaintiffs aside cost for court expenses and counsel fees also want the court to declare that on a true and proper interpretation of chapter 5 of the constitution the president by holding the two detainees under restricted conditions without a court order was breaching their fundamental human rights.