The Supreme Court has rejected an injunction application seeking to halt the approval of President Akufo-Addo’s new ministerial appointees.
The application, brought forth by South Dayi legislator Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, was dismissed by the apex court, deeming it frivolous and an abuse of court processes.
Today’s proceedings at the Supreme Court added some intrigue as the fate of President Akufo-Addo’s newly nominated ministers and reshuffled appointees hung in the balance.
This application prompted the Speaker of Parliament to postpone the approval of the new appointees following their vetting.
Dafeamekpor’s lawsuit against the Speaker of Parliament and the Attorney General contended that the President should have sought parliamentary approval before reassigning ministers whose appointments were revoked.
President Akufo-Addo’s reshuffle on February 14, 2024, resulted in the removal of 13 ministers and 10 deputy ministers, with 6 others being reassigned to different portfolios.
The courtroom saw some drama unfold today as Dafeamekpor and his legal team were conspicuously absent. At one point, the case was put on hold for verification purposes, particularly regarding the service of hearing notices to the parties involved.
The Attorney General criticized the conduct of Dafeamekpor’s lawyer, denouncing it as disrespectful to the apex court and constituting professional misconduct.
Despite the absence of Dafeamekpor and his legal representatives, the court proceeded with the case. However, an interesting twist emerged when the lawyer for the NDC legislator refused to accept court documents, including a hearing notice.
The Speaker of Parliament’s legal team contested the injunction application, arguing that it failed to meet the necessary requirements.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the case, with Justices Kingsley Koomson, Mariama Owusu, Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo (Presiding), Amadu Tanko, and Yaw Darko Asare overseeing the proceedings.
In the end, despite the absence of Dafeamekpor’s lawyers, the Supreme Court ruled against the injunction application.
