The Supreme Court has given #FixTheCountry lobbyist Oliver Barker-Vormawor, an expense of GHc10,000 as it excused a case he addressed on.
Clearly disappointed with the guidelines of cycles recorded, as well as the nature of Mr. Baker-Vormavor's Legal portrayal in court on Tuesday, the court said the application was "unimportant", "vexatious" and the court found "no legitimacy in it".
The vociferous lobbyist was a legal counselor on the record for a gathering calling itself Democratic Accountability Lab in a matter under the watchful eye of the court.
The gathering was trying to commit the Commissioner-General, Ghana Revenue Authority, and the Ghana Revenue Authority itself, to hatred for the May 1, 2022 execution of the questionable e-demand, while there was a directive application forthcoming in regard of the execution.
The gathering let the court know that the activity presented the court to mock.
Sooner had Oliver Barker-Vormawor reported himself than a blast of inquiries overwhelmed him, going from standard practices, through system to meaningful regulation, including point of reference (chose cases).
Leader of the 7-part Court, Nene Amegatcher tested him on the appropriateness of the title of the case brought under the steady gaze of the court.
He additionally inquired as to why the charge was not aimed at a particular authority of the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA), taking note of that associations can't be refered to for disdain.
The women and Lords of the Court again requested from him the legitimate premise whereupon he looked to show up before them, and to commit the public authority and foundation "to jail".
As His Lordship, Emmanuel Yoni Kulendi roared serenely, "we are a courtroom, not a NGO. What we need is your lawful power, not your viewpoint and addresses".
For Her Ladyship, Prof. Mensah-Bonsu, Mr. Barker-Vomarvor came "as a meddlesome spectator".
"You can't be an untouchable who sobs stronger than the dispossessed. So we need to hear you on the law and the specialists", Her Ladyship pounded.
Reeling under the weight and intensity of the impact, the frank dissident looked for shelter under a 1976 High Court choice in Okine v. Mawu and Another.
This case, as per legal counselor Barker-Vormawor, is premise that a scorn application might be brought by even an outsider.
Similarly as woman Lovelace Johnson pushed for current realities of this power and the specific holding of the Court, ruler Professor Ashie Kotei was inquiring as to why a 1976 High Court choice was being utilized to contend a case in 2022 at the Supreme Court.
Not moved by the entries of the Democratic Accountability Lab's attorney, the Court said it did "not figure we ought to approach counsel for the second respondent to answer, the candidate in our view has no locus in this".
"The actual application," the Court said, "is damaged and doesn't compare the act of founding start notice of movements in this court."
Here is the full supplement of the Court, Nene Amegatcher as President, Prof Ashie Kotey, Mariama Owusu, Lovelace Johnson, Gertrude Torkonoo, Prof Henrietta Mensah Bonsu and Emmanuel Yoni Kulendi.
blogpay
Total Comments: 0