Benony Tony Amekudzi
A strange spectacle unfolded at the Supreme Court yesterday during the hearing of the ongoing election petition.
Lawyers on both sides of the electoral dispute had barely finished announcing themselves, when an unknown lawyer, Benony Tony Amekudzi, sprang to the floor to lay a motion before the court.
He claimed to be a Friend of the Court.
In a loud voice, spiced with ample gesticulation and an exotic accent, Mr Amekudzi, without going through the standard procedures, launched himself at the bewilded panel of nine Supreme Court Justices and tried to move a motion to the effect that a sitting President could not be sued or joined as a defendant or a respondent to a lawsuit or petition.
It is unclear how he sneaked into the front row, where the case was being argued, since he was usually spotted sitting behind the NDC executives and having the same accreditation as the other NDC members.
DAILY GUIDE gathered that Mr. Amekudzi is a staunch sympathiser of the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC).
According to Nana Ato Dadzie, a member of the NDC legal team, the gate-crasher had apparently received an express blessing from President Mahama to add to the team of lawyers arguing for him in the Supreme Court.
When he sprang to his feet, lawyers from all sides of the divide looked at him in disbelief for such an audacious diversion of attention from the matter currently being argued in court.
He did so by circumventing the standard processes of filing for such motions in the Supreme Court.
In the Supreme Court, the standard procedure is for such an application to be accompanied by an affidavit. Mr. Amekudzi had none.
The bewilded court audience shifted uneasily and murmured in amusement at the motion that Mr. Amekudzi was seeking to smuggle into the fray.
The lawyer claimed he was filing as Amicus Curiae (Friend of the Court) because his motion was in the supreme interest of the general public.
Later, the panel sought the views of the legal teams of both the petitioners and respondents on Mr. Amekudzi’s strange intervention.
Counsel for the petitioners, Philip Addison argued that “My lords, we do not think that this application is properly before the court….An Amicus Curiae brief is supposed to assist the court in determining a matter that is of public interest.
In this instance, this application has been brought in support of the First Respondent and, therefore, it ceases to be an Amicus Curiae brief.
It is partisan; it is intended to aid one side and that cannot be an Amicus Curiae, for that reason alone, we pray that this application be dismissed.”
Curiously, all the feuding parties, both the petitioners and the respondents overwhelmingly agreed with Philip Addison’s views. Counsel for the National Democratic Congress (NDC), Tsatsu Tsikata, described the gate-crashing lawyer as an “Inter-meddler” who should not be allowed in the proceedings.
The Dismissal
Consequently, the Supreme Court eventually threw out the motion arguing that since a petition is filed before a winner in a presidential election is sworn in, he could be sued in an election petition.
Reading the ruling, the Presiding Judge of the Panel, Justice William Atuguba said, “We are of the opinion that the intervention cannot properly be termed an application to present an Amicus Curiae brief, it being in support of one party represented already by counsel…”
He quoted Article 64 of the 1992 Constitution and Constitutional Instrument 16 (CI. 16) relating to the application.
“As much as an election petition in any rate can be commenced before the person becomes President and being sworn into office, the application is therefore dismissed,” Justice Atuguba said.
Upon hearing the ruling, Mr. Amekudzi having burnt up his gusto, stood up and bowed before he left the front row to the back row of the court.
The Banter
Below are excerpts of the banter between Mr. Amekudzi and the Supreme Court Justices.
Amekudzi: Your lordships, it is in the interest of justice, protection of the rule of law and fair-play that when certain matters are being adjudicated before the court of law and a subtle law in accordance with the rule of law and the principle of the rule of law….(Justice Sule Gbadegbe interrupts)
Justice Gbadegbe: Can you refer to the process before you start making a speech?
Amekudzi: Your lordships, I’m not making a speech, I’m only laying the foundation…. (Interrupted again)
Justice Gbadegbe: No, this is a busy court.
Amekudzi: I know, thank you for your kind advice. Yes, I’m here to pray to this court on motion of notice for leave and even in lieu of an affidavit that is not here, to make the oral argument and to draw the kind attention of this court for some relevant provisions and some well-settled position of the law that are being violated by this court in this particular matter.
When the leave is granted, I will demonstrate beyond all reasonable doubts that yes, there was and there is a pronouncement, a determination of this highest court of the land that in the first instance should be taken into consideration; whether or not, a sitting President of Ghana in office, should be sued or joined as a defendant or a respondent to a lawsuit or petition.
I think at the appropriate time, I will demonstrate to this-excuse me to use the word, I know you are the highest court- honourable court that-if your lordships will permit me-, I will like to read an excerpt from the Constitution of Ghana.
The preamble to that Constitution that sets the tone for the government and the well-being of this great country. … (A judge interrupted him and asked him if he swore to an affidavit before storming the court)
Amekudzi: I’m a lawyer so I signed … (Interrupted again)
Justice Gbadegbe: You have not signed, so what process is it, is it a motion?
Amekudzi: Motion for leave.
Justice Gbadegbe: In this court, the settled practice is that, it is always supported by an affidavit; whether you are a lawyer or not.
Amekudzi: Yes, my lords, I’m not a party in this matter, I’m coming as a friend of this court.
Justice Gbadegbe: But you are coming by way of Motion, and the Motion should support the existing practice. You can ask your colleagues.
Amekudzi: Yeah, I understand, your lordships. You lordships…(Interrupted again)
Justice Gbadegbe: If there is no affidavit in support, then you are out of court
Amekudzi: (Being insistent) I’m now praying for Leave…. (Interrupted again)
Justice Gbadegbe: Motion on notice for Leave…It’s a motion where is the affidavit?
Amekudzi: (Ignoring the question) I think that a paragraph there [in the notice of leave] satisfies the requirement of the law. It is in the interest of justice….
Justice Gbadegbe: When you come before us claiming that we have violated a settled practice, you must go by the practice that enables you to have the courage to tell us… (Amekudzi interrupt)
Amekudzi: Your lordships, I must say, I have been misconstrued, that was never my intention….. (Clearly getting impatient with the continuous banter, Justice Gbadegbe in a stern voice warned the errant lawyer)
Justice Gbadegbe: Please Mr. Amekudzi you know we have a lot of work to do here, if you don’t have an affidavit in support, would you please do the honourable thing and just end it here.
Posts
