Former Auditor-General wins court case against the State

law-and-justiceThe Court of Appeal, Civil Division, on Wednesday dismissed an application filed by the State for stay of execution against the judgment to pay all money owed the former Auditor-General, Mr Edward Dua Agyeman.

The court dismissed the application on grounds that Article 155 of the 1992 Constitution, which the State said was inapplicable, was indeed applicable to plaintiff.

The Fast Track High Court earlier in its judgment directed the State to pay monthly pension and all the money owed the former Auditor-General.

It further directed that the amount should be equivalent to the salary of the current Auditor-General, which was equivalent to that of a Justice of the Court of Appeal.

The Court had on March 25, 2013, ordered the State to pay the monthly pension and all entitlements of Mr Dua Agyeman with effect from June 2012.

In its judgment, the court said the gratuity and pension due Mr Dua Agyeman were in fulfillment of a constitutional obligation owed him by the Republic, since he was appointed under Article 70 (1) of the 1992 Constitution.

The Court said, by the injection of Article 71 (1), Mr Dua Agyeman’s salaries, allowances, facilities and privileges were to be determined by the President, on the recommendations of a committee of not more than five persons appointed by the President, in accordance with the advice of the Council of State.

The plaintiff’s gratuity consists of three months’ salary for every year of service he had served in the Audit Service, which was enjoyed by his predecessor.

Mr Dua Agyeman sued the Attorney-General Department after several requests for the payment of his gratuity and pension, as conveyed by his letter of appointment, had failed.

The plaintiff retired from the Audit Service on May 19, 2010 and in response to his demand for the payment of his gratuity and pension, he received a letter dated October 18, 2010 signed by the Deputy Chief of Staff, Dr Valerie Sawyerr.

The letter informed Mr Dua Agyemang of government’s decision not to pay him retirement benefits in accordance with Article 71 (1) of the 1992 Constitution.

The plaintiff said the letter indicated that he (Mr Dua Agyeman) was a political appointee and not a career staff of the Audit Service or any other public service and, therefore, did not qualify for pension.

Source: GNA

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.