AMIDU VS WOYOME OPPOSING AFFIDAVIT TO DISCHARGE OR REVERSE
In this affidavit I contend that the Government of Ghana’s interest is not in enforcing the order of the Supreme Court. Instead, the incumbent Government represented by the Attorney General is merely giving the appearance of enforcing the order of the Court while simultaneously entering into a confidentiality agreement with Alfred Agbesi Woyome as Executive Chairman, a director, and sole shareholder of Anator Holding. This discreet agreement aims to facilitate Woyome’s ability to refund the monies ordered by this Court. Such actions by the incumbent Government negate the letter and spirit of Article 2 of the 1992 Constitution and the enforcement jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Moreover, I maintain that under Article 2 of the 1992, when the Attorney General is being sued for unconstitutional conduct, and a declaration of unconstitutionality is made against the Attorney General, it will be a negation of the letter and spirit of the Constitution to say that the public interest Plaintiff who has prosecuted the action has no capacity to ensure proper and effective execution of the order, even when the Attorney General’s actions are not of substance for purposes of enforcing the decisions and order of the Supreme Court.
THE LOOTER GOVERNMENT AND THE LOOTEE
Woyome has accused me in the media of having ordered or authorized the Ministry of Finance to pay him part of the GHC51.2million that the incumbent Government unconstitutionally looted for him. However, the fact that I had nothing to do with the authorizations written to the Ministry of Finance to pay any portion of the looted public purse to Woyome was already determined finally in the declarations made by the Supreme Court on 29th July 2014. Moreover, the Government’s own “Commission of Enquiry Into Payments From Public Funds Arising From Judgment Debts & Akin Matters (2012/C.I 79)” commended my honesty and integrity in the matter. The media and the public are being hoodwinked by Woyome’s outburst and the incumbent Government’s overwhelming silence to set the records straight. Citizens, you have a choice to make. How much longer will we hear stories of inadvertence, mischief and connivance by an incumbent Government that strips the Republic’s coffers bare so that ordinary Ghanaians must suffer financial hardship? PUT GHANA FIRST and let us get our looted money back by voting the incumbent looter Government out on 7th December 2016. Protect Ghana and the government purse by voting for a new President.
AMIDU'S AFFIDAVIT IN OPPOSITION TO WOYOME'S STAY OF PROCEEDINGS
I believe that the application for stay of proceedings is only intended to subvert the order of the Supreme Court dated 16th November 2016 for the examination of the 3rd defendant/judgment debtor/applicant, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, who has since the ruling of the Supreme Court on 16th November 2016 stated in several interviews on radio, television and via electronic media that he considers himself being persecuted by the Supreme Court and that he would do everything to the last drop of his blood to prevent the Court from enforcing the order of 16th November 2016 for his examination
PRESIDENT’S CONDUCT IS REASON GHANA NEEDS A NEW PRESIDENT
First we have the outbursts of Woyome as the losing party in court, which may be ignored as tension relieving therapy for a wounded ego, emotions, and mental exhaustion. Woyome and the media may continue with their contempt of the Court while the decision and order are pending. I will not be part of it. Second we have the accusations of a Deputy Attorney General who opts to try his case in the court of public opinion because he proved to be incompetent on the day. Since when did it become ethical practice to resort to print and electronic media as the medium of arguing an appeal or review of the decision of a Court of law where Ayine has lost? Third, we have the President of the Republic of Ghana – sworn by constitutional oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution – who is shown on television castigating the decision of the Supreme Court. Should we be concerned that as the chief looter in this case, the President is determined to prevent the examination ordered by the Court? Is the President (with the Executive Authority including all policing powers) not then intimidating me simply for exercising my constitutional right to access to justice before the Supreme Court? I say again countrymen and women with all my soul and with all my heart that: “Defend the 1992 Constitution by voting for a new President on 7th December 2016 to get our money back.”
GOVERNMENT DOES NOT INTEND TO RECOVER THE LOOT
Government is purposefully deceiving the electorate that efforts are being made to retrieve the unconstitutional loot by Woyome jointly with Austro-Invest, the client of Lithur-Brew and Co, a law firm in which the Attorney General was a partner. Woyome’s part-payment in a cheque drawn by Woyome in favour of the Economic and Organized Crime Office, which was not a party to the action or the judgment creditor, cannot be a cheque in part payment of the unconstitutional monies ordered by the Court to be refunded to the Republic. Unfortunately, the Government as the leading looter has put obstacles in our way in enforcing the orders of the Court. Do not be hoodwinked by electioneering ploys. Let us defend the 1992 Constitution by voting for a new President on 7th December 2016 to get our money back.
SUPREME COURT DECLARED LITHUR-BREW AS JOINT LOOTERS
The drunken tantrums cowardly thrown by Omane Boamah show the shallowness of his education, understanding, and lack of diligence and industry in researching matters on which he is to defend the Government in public. Simple common sense would have informed the almighty Minister of Communications who sought to take over Multi TV/Joy FM to insult me that in arguing my case before the Supreme Court on 10th November 2016, I referred the Court to its own unanimous decision given in my favour on 29th July 2014. I am constrained from making any further comment on the case apart from calling the public’s attention to the final decision of the Supreme Court, a public record, in respect of Austro-Invest Management Services Limited which is admitted to have been the client of Lithur-Brew and Co, the firm of the current Attorney General.
BE ALERT TO THE ELECTORAL COMMISSIONER’S OTHER TRICKS
The eyes of every citizen have been opened to the arbitrary conduct and impunity exhibited by the Electoral Commissioner, and the political parties are now fully aware as to how the power of the Commissioner can be wantonly abused. Let us watch the rigging agenda of the Commissioner and her mentors during the remaining election period. She has already engineered elections in such a way that a good six weeks have been lost for the campaign period of the NDP, PPP, and the PNC. Her actions affect the equal right and facilities for political campaigning mandatorily enjoined by the Constitution. Fellow citizens be alert to the Commissioner’s other tricks. The Commissioner cannot be trusted to fairly implement her mandate under the 1992 Constitution without vigilance on our part. We must defend the Constitution!
CONGRATULATIONS TO AMERICAN PRESIDENT-ELECT, DONALD TRUMP
Congratulations president elect, Donald trump, may your stand against corruption, cronyism, patronage, and disguised political extortion by the political establishment and their greedy allies make not only America but the whole world great again.
ELECTORAL COMMISSIONER IS STILL DETERMINED TO RIG THE ELECTIONS
The Electoral Commissioner is using technical grounds to render nugatory the decision and orders of the Supreme Court, where the Court ordered that “in appropriate cases to afford candidates the opportunity to comply with regulation ((2) of the Public Election Regulations, 2016 (C.I. 94)”. She is taking advantage of the Supreme Court’s ruling to wager on the fact that she is entitled by the Court’s ruling within the new nomination period to put forth alleged new and profound errors that will make it impossible for even Nduom and those others who have judgments in their favour, to alter or amend the specific errors for which they obtained their respective judgments in the High Court. Let us wait for how the Supreme Court will rise to the occasion of this new twist to its ruling should any applications be made to it today.
AMIDU APPLIES TO THE SUPREME COURT TO EXAMINE WOYOME
I would like to assure all public spirited Ghanaians that should I be given the opportunity to examine the Judgment Debtor, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, in Court the good people of Ghana will hear and see the beneficiaries of the unconstitutional judgment debt in the NDC and this Government. Gargantuan crimes were indeed committed as I stated in 2012. Corruption is trying to prevent the public from hearing the whole story from the horse’s own mouth. I challenge the honesty and integrity of the President and the Government to allow the examination of its financier, the Judgment Debtor, Alfred Agbesi Woyome to proceed without hindrance if they have nothing to hide.
THE INEXPERIENCE, INCOMPETENCE AND ARROGANCE OF THE EC
The Electoral Commissioner has effectively rigged the election. She does not appear to understand that the letter and spirit of the 1992 Constitution enjoins her to ensure that every political party and its aspiring presidential candidate or an individual aspirant has equal time and opportunity to canvass for the votes of the electorate. There can be no free, transparent and fair elections when disqualified aspiring candidates have their names added to the ballot more than three weeks belatedly, because the Commissioner’s preferred and approved candidates would have had an unequal advantage over them in the contest for the Presidency. Nobody can convince such candidates, their political parties, and supporters and the objective observer that they had a level playing field for the 7th December 2016 elections within the letter and spirit of the Constitution.
THE ELECTORAL COMMISSIONER'S ABUSE OF POWER
The EC Commissioner's arbitrary and unlawful disqualification of 13 aspiring presidential candidates and her arrogant attitude towards those distinguished citizens and their political parties or supporters does not conduce to her image as an impartial arbiter of elections. In Ghana's present circumstances the plurality of political parties fielding candidates at the presidential elections is the only guarantee to effectively policing the process by the presence, and alertness of their supporters, polling assistants and others at the polling stations on the day of elections. Whosoever wins the 2016 Presidential Elections must do so transparently and fairly. We must put Ghana First by equalizing the disadvantages of the political parties in opposition to ensure that they have a fair and even chance against any abuse of incumbency by this Government which is definitely very desperate to remain in power after eight years. Let us watch every step of this Electoral Commissioner in this election year.
MONTIE FM CRIMINAL CONTEMPT – AMIDU’S REJOINDER
Herewith my rejoinder on the expressions of disagreement by two lawyers, Messrs. George Loh and Ayikoi Otoo with portions of my case commentary on the Owners of the Station – Montie FM criminal contempt case.
MONTIE FM CRIMINAL CONTEMPT – MARTIN AMIDU'S TAKE
It is beyond argument that the Supreme Court is clothed with the power to commit for contempt of itself under the 1992 Constitution. But the same Constitution enjoins the Supreme Court to exercise all its powers in accordance with the due process of law and to respect the fundamental human rights and freedoms guaranteed under it. In view of this, the decision in the Owners of the Station Montie FM criminal contempt of court case raises several issues of constitutional, professional, and public importance. Upon further reading, my conclusion is that the lawyers for the accused persons did not help the Court and the accused persons when they failed or refused to raise all the constitutional and legal defences against the charges and arraignment processes.
INTERCEPTION OF POSTAL PACKETS & TELECOMMUNICATION MESSAGES
I examine and analyze the memorandum to or accompanying the Bill to see whether or not it complies with Article 106 (2) of the Constitution to warrant its introduction in Parliament and conclude that it does not. I proceed to examine and analyze selected provisions of the Bill and adduce reasons why they may be unconstitutional, inconsistent with existing law, or need to be harmonized with the existing law to achieve the objects of Article 106(2) of the Constitution in addressing defects in the existing law and providing remedies to those defects in the Bill. I conclude with the conviction that the civil liberties of Ghanaians may require that the Bill be withdrawn to enable it meet the constitutional precondition for it to be properly introduced in Parliament.
STOP PARTISAN ATTACKS ON THE STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS
We should stop subjectively attacking personalities unless we have credible supporting evidence. I am disappointed that a non-partisan civil society organization such as Let My Vote Count Alliance has stooped so low in making unsubstantiated charges of political bias against named constitutionally protected public officers, simply because they had been nominated to represent their respective public institutions on the now well-known Electoral Commission’s Steering Committee for Election 2016. What is more relevant is that good and strong institutions with institutional cultures dictate what persons appointed to those offices do, and not where those persons are coming from.
AMIDU'S STATEMENT & OBJECTION TO ABDULAI MUHAMMED'S ACTION
Commonsense should have warned the Plaintiff/Respondent that an ordinary bench of this court hearing his Writ of Summons and Statement of Case will have no jurisdiction to declare the ruling of the review bench in Amidu (No 3) v Attorney General, Waterville (BVI) Ltd & Woyome (No 2) (2013-2014) 1 SCGLR 606 null and void or in any other manner attempt to review same under the smokescreen of exercising any original jurisdiction in this action.
ABDULAI MUHAMMED VS ATTORNEY GENERAL, WOYOME & AMIDU
The nature of the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff, Abdulai Yusif Fansah Muhammed, from the Supreme Court in this action are clearly stated on three of them to be for the benefit of Alfred Agbesi Woyome and the exoneration of the Attorney-General who unconstitutionally paid the judgment debt to Woyome. Why has the Plaintiff decided to join them as the 1st and 2nd Defendants in this action to create the impression that his interest diverges from theirs? Are they really Defendants or is the Plaintiff their surrogate? That is the answer to look from their responses to the Plaintiff’s case.
COMMISSIONS OF ENQUIRY & NON-POLITICAL WHITE PAPERS
I am deliberately exposing the politicization of the White Paper on the Commissioner’s report to enable people capable of rational and dispassionate reasoning see the inherent dangers any Government faces when it usurps the powers of the Attorney-General or when an Attorney-General allows his office to be usurped or abused by the Presidency. It also underscores what happens when a Government acts deliberately and covertly to cover political corruption by besmearing other coordinate organs of Government and political opponents in a manner inconsistent with or in contravention of the constitution.
I HAVE NOTHING PERSONAL AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT OR THE PRESIDENT
In my whole life I have never courted praise or approbation in playing out my character. I would rather stand for what I believe to be the truth even if it means I stand alone. No insults or name calling will change that after more than 64 years of my existence. I should be able to tell my maker when I get out or up there or wherever it may be, that I served Him or Her to the best of my ability; I served the Holy Catholic Church to the best of my human ability; I served my nation truly and served my people.