Law graduates petition Chief Justice over Supreme Court decision

Chief Justice Akufo

A group of concerned law graduates from the Ghana School of Law have petitioned the Chief Justice, for a pronouncement regarding the decision by the Supreme Court.

A petition signed by Ken Donkor Addor, Naomi Sam, Godfried Tessu Kwame, Sussie Ntim and Irene Korley-Ayerteye said the case was instituted by Professor Stephen Kwaku Asare against the General Legal Council and the Attorney General.

It said the substance of their petition was that since the Court has declared the entrance examination and interviews for admission into the Law School unconstitutional and illegal, they prayed the Council for an understanding of the dilemma.

The petitioners said they have been placed in a dilemma, asking them to take part in an act or a series of acts declared illegal and unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

They said as law graduates, they have been taught that once an act was declared illegal and unconstitutional, it is so ‘ab initio’ and no action could be found on an illegality.

It is also their case that their rights are being infringed upon because they are being asked to take part in an illegal act.

“In their view, the Supreme Court judgment was explicitly clear in the sense that the Supreme Court itself has declared the examination to be illegal and unconstitutional,” the petitioners added.

They, therefore, prayed the Council to grant them automatic admission to the Ghana Law School as all of them qualified for admission by virtue of the decision of the apex court in the matter under reference.

In October 2015, Professor Kweku Asare filed a suit against the General Legal Council and the Attorney-General over the way and manner the Ghana School of Law conducts its entrance exams and interview for students, who want admission into the school.

The plaintiff in his suit prayed for a declaration that GLC’s imposition of entrance examination and interview requirements for the Professional Law Course violates Articles ll (7) 297 (d) 23, 296 (a) (b) and 18 (2) of the 1992 Constitution.

He also sought a declaration that the GLC’s exclusion of persons who have qualified under Regulation 2 of L1 1296 from pursuing the Professional law course violates Article ll (7)297 (d), 23, and 296 (a) and (b) of the Constitution.

The plaintiffs also prayed the court for an order directed at the GLC to specify within 60 days; alternative places and modes of instructions that would afford all persons meeting the requirement of Regulation 2 of Ll 1296 the opportunity to pursue the profession component of legal education, the completion of which entitles them to take the qualifying certificate examinations as determined by the GLC.

Source: GNA

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.