Category: Opinions

..The Imani’s Amicus Curiae Joke

By James Mckeown

Many will agree with me the term amicus curiae brief became popular in Ghana in the 2012 election petition when the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed an application for amicus curiae, filed by Lawyer Benoni Tony Amekudzi, which sought to argue that it was unlawful for the NPP to join John Mahama to the lawsuit because he was a sitting president.

The court rejected the application by indicating that John Mahama had been sued as a candidate who had benefited from a supposedly fraudulent election. It is important to note that Lawyer Amekudzi was in court to draw the court’s attention to a constitutional provision which he thought the court had not averted its mind to.

What is amicus curiae? Literally,amicus curiae is a “friend of the court” andamicus curiae brief is a document filed by an individual or organization to present arguments in addition to those presented by the immediate parties to a case. Normally, a person or group who is not a party to a lawsuit, but has a strong interest in the matter, will petition the court for permission to submit a brief in the action with the intent of providing expert opinion, or providing relevant information missing in the statements of claim or defence of the litigants or averting the mind of the court to a relevant legislation the court or the parties may have overlooked.

With this basic knowledge let’s interrogate the brief filed by Imani and the other Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) vis-à-vis the grounds for rejection of the application.

It is instructive to note that the court rejected the application simply because the amicus brief was not supported by law.

1. Imani failed to draw the court’s attention to any law or decision that appears to have been overlooked by the parties in the case. When Chief Justice Anin Yeboah asked lawyer Joe Aboagye Debrah whether he had read the two cases pending at the Apex court, he responded that he had not read. Is it not surprising to any sane mind how Imani was able to reach a conclusion that they can add something new to the court if they had not read the writ? All hail franklin Cudjoe and his friends, the new magicians in town. This was a joke!!!
2. Imani failed to demonstrate any expertise in law or regarding the matter pending to merit audience in the case. This is a matter that borders on legal interpretation and the Supreme Court has the primary and final jurisdiction. So, how on earth do you submit an amicus brief without reference to any relevant legislation or facts missing in the writs submitted by the litigants? As a CSO which has opinion on every issue but expertise on none, what sort of expert opinion were they seeking to express at the Supreme Court?
3. Imani lacked the neutral identity expected of an amicus curiae in order to submit a brief. It is a fact that for a person to submit a curiae brief, you must be an interested party. It is your interest in the case that would move you to submit the application in the first place. However, it is unacceptable to appear as a friend of a party in the litigation disguising yourself as friend of the court. An amicus curiae is more or less an intervener, an impartial adviser to a court of law in a particular case. What was the meaning of that trick? Was it a case of an overhyped goat thinking it can outrun and escape from a lion?

We must recognize that the court is not deaf to happenings in its environment. The court takes cognizance of comments of people outside the court. This explains why some individuals including Sammi Awuku, Ken Kuranchie, Sir John and Atubiga were found to be contempt of the Supreme Court because of their comments outside the court.

The court was aware of the position and utterances of the CSOs so for them to cloak themselves as friends of the court was extremely disingenuous. For all intents and purposes, Imani and the other CSOs had not gone to the court to assist it with any new information useful in determining the matter but rather to support a side.

I find it quite disturbing to read arguments from Prof ‘‘Azar’’ and Prof. H.K Nketia which sought to suggest that the issue of neutrality of an amicus curiae is alien. I am convinced Justice Baffoe Bonie was right in directing the CSOs to rather join the case or submit the so-called arsenals or relevant information they have to the party they support.

I have always advised that we should be mindful of some of these vulture CSOs and the way the media gives them so much opportunity to sometimes express their pedestrian views as if they are experts and are embodiment of knowledge in all fields from archaeology to medicine.

Franklin Cudjoe and Bright Simons made so much noise in the media that the Electoral Commission had no right and justification for compiling a new voters’ register yet they were afraid to take the matter to court. They knew it was going to be a Sisyphusian task to convince the Supreme Court with their hollow arguments so they sought to engage in populist gimmicks. We entertain too much empty noise in Ghana.

I wish the Supreme Court had sanctioned Imani and the other CSOs to deter others from treating the apex court as some kind of an amphitheatre for comedy. I thought the Amekudzi amicus curiae joke in 2013 was enough. With all said, I feel very sad for lawyer Joe Aboagye Debrah. He is a fine, brilliant Lawyer. He didn’t deserve this. Unfortunately, a client with a bad case has a way of subjecting an experienced lawyer to public ridicule. I hope somebody has learnt a lesson.

Asiedu Nketia’s Comfortable lead

Were you surprised about the speed with which Asiedu Nketia spoke with the Media? The truth is, Asiedu Nketia is not happy with Mr Koku Anyidoho for his utterances in the media in recent times. Yes, seriously. Hm…Asiedu Nketia has become so petty and jealous of Koku Anyidoho to the extent that he was willing to go every extent to take the comfortable lead tittle from Koku. Hurray…let’s welcome General Mosquito, the new King of comfortable lead. You can laugh again!! But on a more serious note, I disagree with those who have subjected the NDC General Secretary to ridicule thinking he misunderstood the verdict. What Asiedu Nketia did was a calculated grand scheme to create unnecessary chaos. The NDC is not comfortable with the compilation of a new voters’ register and have decided to go every length to disrupt or stall the process no matter how ludicrous and farcical it will appear in the sight of right thinking Ghanaians. Didn’t you see the tenacity and confidence with which he spoke about their comfortable lead? Even legal aficionados who had read the statement of claim and the reliefs of the NDC and were sure the NDC didn’t have any strong argument intelligent enough to convince the Supreme Court were thrown off balance by the sheer bravado of Asiedu Nketia.

Did you see how Abraham Amaliba and Edudzi Tamakloe both NDC lawyers who are supposed to know better were standing behind the general secretary nodding their heads like agama lizards in support of such ignorance, lies, misinformation and misreporting instead of correcting him? They knew what they were doing. I agree with those who say the journalists should have spoken to the lawyers instead of Asiedu Nketia. However, I do not think they would have said anything different from what General Mosquito said. They had rehearsed the same statement.

The Facebook President

As for the Facebook President, Mr John Mahama, the least said about him the better. He now behaves like a lousy boxer who has been dealt a hefty blow. Ntase ntase akye no. He struggled to make any sense in his press briefing after the Supreme Court verdict. His attempts to incite people against the Electoral Commission and the hardworking government of Nana Akufo-Addo will not wash.

Indubitably, John Mahama and his NDC are setting the agenda to discredit the impending general election with the view to legitimizing their future post-election misbehaviour. Ghanaians should not treat such a devilish agenda against the peace of the country as some form of joke and laugh it off. We will resist any attempt by any dead goat to resurrect to disturb the peace of the country.

The Supreme Court has spoken and the verdict is unambiguous. The EC is ready to ensure all qualified Ghanaians are registered. Remember you have the right to vote but you have responsibility to register before you can enjoy such right. Let us be citizens, follow the necessary COVID-19 protocols and join the queue to register to vote. Elections belong you. It’s your decision. But if you decide to turn your back on the fire and burn your behinds, then you will just have to sit on your blisters.

Long live Ghana

James McKeown

1^st Vice Chairman,

NPP- Finland

jmckeown1@yahoo.com

jamckeow@ulapland.fi

Disclaimer: “The views/contents expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of sankofaonline.com. Sankofaonline.com will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article.”

Folks,

People always have in interest in anything they decide to invest some time and effort in. Before I talk about today’s event at the Supreme Court of Ghana and what it means to me personally, let me share this:

I was looking through my google photos and reminiscing what happened around this time, six years ago, in the week of June 22nd. That was the day I became a father.

On 29th June, I took a picture of my son, while he half-stared blankly at me, and resolved that my best legacy to him would be to leave a world, and a country far better to live in than I met it. I owe him that much if I brought him into this world.

It was this same week that experienced an escalation of sentiment that reached a crescendo driven mostly in part by horrendous decisions of the then Mahama government, which led, or birthed the OccupyFlagstaffHouse demonstration just a week later.

Some of us began taking steps that began with derision, mockery, contempt, laughter, insults, open hostility and a host of other actions both overt and covert designed to portray us as having ulterior motives and illusions of grandeur and power-hunger.

Indeed, we stood in the rain on the first of July, and some of us, in the 2 years that followed, helped trigger some kind awareness that blossomed into a social movement. Some of those who were active in that movement ended up justifying the tags that were given us, as they comfortably now hold positions in power and exercise the same powers that they protested against, excesses and impunity included. Yet, on those days, we were brothers and sisters in arms, in solidarity for the need for better governance.

I congratulate them on their stellar rise into power, prestige and influence. They are shaping the nation into this new decade, hopefully of prosperity… I digress.

Today, the same people that identified us as devils, who set the BNI on us, filmed us while marching, attempted to arrest and prosecute our friends based on whimsical brainwaves are now cheerleaders of some sort, hoping that our advocacy reaps results that they deem will even the governance playing field.

Today, those that saw us as friends when we were advocating, who knew we NEVER took a dime from anyone, do not shy at an opportunity to impugn a multiplicity of ulterior motives including very far-fetched yet delusional claims of some of us collecting monies for the sole purpose of pushing some “agenda” against their anointed.

It is against this same Electoral Commission that some of us sued for them to exercise their powers in Article 55 of the constitution and the Political Parties Act. Infact, the fluid nature of the need for electoral reforms led to the relevance and finality of the Pink Sheet as an electoral record during the Election Petition.

This same fluid growth of the Commission, an amalgamation of different elements of expertise brought together to execute a crucial mandate of our 4th Republican constitution, has necessitated massive public interest this year in its stance as to the conduct of our elections.

Most of the commentary around the issues raised by IMANI have been pedestrian, and have sought to align, or merge the reasoning around IMANI’s opposition to a new electoral register as that of the NDC. That is to be expected as a political cost of the landscape in which we operate.

While the end-game looks the same, the reasoning of the NDC completely differs from that of IMANI, and anyone who took an interest beyond the enthusiastic bubble of social commentary will see the crux of the matter:

In the discharge of statutory duty, whose evolution involves the use of technology, how do we justify profligate spending, continuity of data, the life of data, the quality and benchmarks of equipment and systems used for data capture, storage, transmission, verification, integrity and retrieval, and what would be the right checks and balances in terms of judicious use of the nation’s resources towards these purposes?

The question is whether state institutions would be working at cross-purposes, enhancing co-operation, driving innovation or become vessels for profligate spending or not, and whether the judiciary, being one of the main pillars of a state with the rule of law, could intervene in a way as to ensure judicious use of resources, of which our data, yours and mine, and our biometric and digital footprint will not be used as a tool for misaligned public expenditure.

That principle, explained in the Amicus Curiae, differs completely from the positions adduced by any political party for which they are in contention with the EC, but allows for further interpretation of the more pithy and contentious factors around data usage.

Down the line, 10 years, 20 years from now, judicial decisions will not only be on the matter of the trajectory of the law, but also on the evolution of technology and the artifical personalities it creates, and how problematic their interpretation will be in the act of jurisprudence. We have already seen some of this in landmark cases across the world when it came to data privacy in the Facebook vs EU court ruling, or the interpretation of what copyright and IP meant in the Oracle vs Google case, or even the famous Apple vs Samsung Case, which all blaze the trail for the position of technology and our attitudes to it in law.

As an advocacy group, IMANI threads where most fear to thread, mainly because most people will want to avoid this same kind of public and media posturing that seeks to out the advocates as some sort of mercenary gang only driven by some “unseen hand” that just drives them to mischief or some kind of appendage to whichever convenient opposition can be tagged to it.

The Supreme Court of this land has decided not to see any merit in what IMANI had to say, based on an impression of bias. Fair enough. The apex court of this land has spoken. In engagements of this nature, the problematic aspects that get buried always have an annoying, funny and urgent way of popping up again, since the core of the matters therein could not attain finality.

In every war, and a perpetual war towards the attainment of good governance, there will be sieges, skirmishes, attrition, battles and there will be defeats and victories. In a way, we all have to be chivalrous and also understand the terrain. That war needs tenacious soldiers. That war needs battle hardened souls.

As I sit writing this, my son has just fallen asleep. I see him now and remember the picture I had of him, at 3 days old, when we were in similar circumstances 6 years ago, with all the hate and acrimony that was directed at us, and pledging then, like I pledge now:

I will be on the right side of history.

I will leave a legacy of a better nation, I promise on my honor to be faithful and loyal to Ghana, and to him. The biggest thing we can bequeath to our children is the pride of our nationhood, who we are, what we mean what we stand for.

I declare today my interest. It isn’t on a printed paper with dead presidents. It’s in the breath and life of the future, my children, your children, our children, that we leave a better world for them, and that we did something that inspires them to be greater and do better.

So yes, laugh. Play the same old record about “losing credibility”. You are just playing an old broken, analog record that is losing its timbre.

We digital baby!

By Selorm Branttie, Vice-President for Innovation & Technology

Disclaimer: “The views/contents expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of sankofaonline.com. Sankofaonline.com will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article.”

By Jude Thaddeus Taylor

THE HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD HAD TOLD JOHN WHO REVEALED IT IN THE BOOK OF REVELATION THAT; EVEN AT THE TIME OF WRITTEN THAT BOOK GOD WAS DISPLEASED WITH THE ACTIVITIES OF THE HUMAN KNOWLEDGE AND ANTICS CREEPING INTO THE BODY.

This revelation came to the apostle (he was not a title loving and claiming Christ-follower) John while he was in exile on the island of Patmos approximately in the year A.D 90. To God already during this time was fed up with what was going on in His Church and therefore did not hide His feelings (Rev.1:4)

WHAT THIS SHOWED US WAS THAT MANY HAD STARTED THEN, FORSAKING CHRIST AS THE CENTRE OF (THE BODY OF CHRIST “CHURCH” ) GOD’S ADMINISTRATION ACCORDING TO HIS ETERNAL ECONOMIA. PLEASE HUMBLY CHECK YOUR ACTIVITIES IN THE BODY OF CHRIST “THE CHURCH” NOW, IT’S NOT TOO LATE YOU CAN REPENT.

So the Holy Spirit within John foretold of the Revelation of Christ and the Testimony of Jesus. Let me borrow extracts from the Book. “V.1: The revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to Him to show to His slaves the things that must quickly take place; and He made it known by sign, sending it to His angel to His slave John (how many of our colleagues even accept this accolade or title slave)

V.2: Who testified the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ, even all he saw.

V.3: Blessed be he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy and keep the things written in it, for the time is near.

V.4: John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace to you and peace from Him who is and who was and who is coming, from the seven Spirits who are before His Throne”,

Unquote: Let me highlight something which I have been stressing to those of us who claim to have the approval of God to open churches that, it is not TRUE. What is being misunderstood here is that individuals with gifts and ministry within the Body turning them or referring to them as churches. Prayer and Bible study GROUPS within the “CHURCH” are not to be made private churches or institutions. BRETHREN STAY HUMBLE WITHIN THE BODY OF JESUS CHRIST AND DO NOT BRANCH OUT.

If God had shown displeasure then(AD90), one will understand His hollow now(AD2020). Every gift or ministry was to have to be within the “CHURCH” which apostle Paul had the Spirit’s direction to teach us about it in the “Book of Ephesians” which gave us guide and guidance about God’s preference of the Church growth and existing(ongoing spiritual evolution of the Church to take us to meet with Him whence He comes again.

We do know that God is not a man to be confused about His plans, especially after He has placed the HOLY SPIRIT in charge of the Church on earth. I am still writing pieces about our relationship with the SPIRIT FATHER and the HOLY SPIRIT so pray with me. If it is the same HOLY SPIRIT who warned apostle John about God’s displeasure about the “CHURCH” situation in AD 90, how could the same HOLY SPIRIT begin to give wrong signals and directions to individuals with such conflicts of claims which have brought to the ” CHURCH” such shame as we see today worldwide?

LOOKING AT THE WHAT I SPOKE OR HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT APOSTLE; PAUL STRESSED IN THE HOLY BIBLE IN EPHESIANS.

The subject God took up in the Book of Ephesians is that the CHURCH – The Mystery of Christ, the Body Christ as the Fullness or Complete of Christ, Becoming the Fullness of God. also the full sufficiency for His Body. This book was written by apostle Paul in AD64 nearly thirty years before the writing of the Book of Revelation yet men had turned deaf ears to bring about the seven churches in Asia mention. These churches came about because of human factors, corruption, often mislead by Satan.

God is not going to destroy anyone yet as He is still the loving God a FARMER who knows how to handle weeds within His viable or valuable crops. The caution is, do not wait until harvest time otherwise you (the thrash) will be found out and burnt as you may be of no use then. At the moment your camouflage can be unnoticed by men but not God, the danger for my writing is for the ignorant flocks being led astray.

I will like to touch on a few moments in the Book of Ephesians.ONE. Paul stresses the will of God 1:1-2,

God’s blessings and position received by the Church in Christ. TWO (A) 1: 3-14.God’s blessings to the Church; a. The Father’s selection and predestination, speaking forth God’s eternal purpose,

b. The Son’s redemption speaking forth the accomplishment of God’s eternal purpose,

c. The Spirit sealing and pledging, speaking forth the application of God’s accomplished

From here I am going for the high moments.

(B). THE APOSTLE’S PRAYER FOR THE CHURCH REGARDING REVELATION 1: 15 -23.

(C).THE PRODUCING AND BUILDING OF THE CHURCH 2: 1 -22;

(D). THE STEWARDSHIP OF THE GRACE AND THE REVELATION OF THE MYSTERY CONCERNING THE CHURCH 3: 1 -13;

(E). THE APOSTLE’S PRAYER FOR THE CHURCH REGARDING EXPERIENCE 3: 14 -21;

THREE: THE LIVING AND RESPONSIBILITY NEEDED FOR THE CHURCH IN “THE HOLY SPIRIT” 4:1 -6:20;

(A). THE LIVING AND RESPONSIBILITY NEEDED IN THE BODY OF CHRIST:4:1-16

(B). THE LIVING NEEDED IN THE DAILY WALK. 4: 17 -5:21

(C). THE LIVING NEEDED IN ETHICAL RELATIONSHIPS 5:22- 6:9

(D).THE WARFARE REQUIRED FOR DEALING WITH THE SPIRITUAL ENEMY 6:10 -20

FOURTH: CONCLUSION 6:21-24; RECOMMEND TO YOU VVS 21-22; BLESSING VV. 23-24

PLEASE NONE IS RESTRICTED FROM USING THESE FOR YOUR STUDIES.

Jude Thaddeus Taylor, © 2020

The author: JudeThaddeusTaylor