logo

Concerned law graduates petition Chief Justice

By
Morkporkpor Anku, GNA

Accra, July 1, GNA – 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.

GNA

Please follow and like us:

Share
#

Write a comment

3+7 = ?