He accuses them of funny judgments
NPP legal head describes comments as 'embarrassing, unfortunate'
The New Patriotic Party, NPP, has responded to a recent harsh critique of the Judiciary by former President John Dramani Mahama.
The NPP's response came via the head of its Legal Committee, Frank Davies, who described Mahama's statements, made in the United States, as 'unfortunate and embarrassing,' and a show of ‘intellectual hypocrisy.’
In an interview on Joy FM's news programme, Top Story, that aired on Monday, March 28, Davis explained that the former president's allegations lacked any basis in logic.
“It’s not only unfortunate, but it’s rather embarrassing that a former President of this Republic, Mr. John Mahama who speak about the Judiciary in such terms. I am really baffled. This is the former President who has presided over affairs of state,” he stated.
He also accused Mahama of being intellectually dishonest in his assessment of the Judiciary especially as he cited claims against the Judiciary as made by Prof. Raymond Atuguba, a former Executive Secretary under his presidency, to back his point.
TWI NEWS
“Is John Mahama trying to tell the whole world that at the time that he was President and the Supreme Court judges were working in this country, their judgments were skewed in his favour?
"I really can’t understand why he does this to himself. So is it right to say that the election petition of 2013 when he won by a majority of five to four in that election petition, the judges skewed it in his favour? That is the logic Mr. Mahama is portraying? then it is sad”, he stressed.
What Mahama said
During his recent tour of the United States, John Mahama delivered a stern critique of state institutions taking particular aim at what he said was a politicized judiciary.
In an address to the US Chapter of the NDC at the Bentley University over the weekend, Mahama affirmed that the party had a problem with the Judiciary.
“We do have problems with the Judiciary, I must say. I think that it is necessary for some internal reforms to take place there. It is necessary for the Chief Justice or whoever is responsible to make some reforms.
"Most of the governance institutions have been politicised. I give the example of the Judiciary. It is only in Ghana that a Supreme Court will make a decision that a birth certificate is not proof of citizenship”, he said.
He continued, “there are many such funny judgements that have been given. I remember at one time, our colleague Professor Raymond Atuguba said that from research he had done, judges turn to give their judgements in favour of the political party or leader that appointed them.
"He was subjected to such a whirlwind of indignation by the Judiciary, but if you bring it down to what is happening today, and you look at it and see who appointed who, you will find that there was some truth in the research.
"The thing is, our constitution gives the security of tenure to judges. Once you have been appointed, you cannot be removed. That is why we give security of tenure so that you will have the courage no matter who appointed you to give judgement according to your conscience. That is what our judges should do. They must rise to the occasion”.
