logo

31 July 2017

Court annuls Interior Ministry’s deportation of Indian

An Accra High Court has quashed the Interior Minister’s decision to deport an Indian, Ashok Kumar Sivaram, out of the country.

The court said Ambrose Derry overstepped his bounds by determining fraud against the plaintiff without resorting to the court.

Presided over by Justice Kwaku Ackah Boafo, the court said Mr Dery violated the rule of natural justice by refusing the plaintiff a hearing after he had accused him of allegedly committing fraud.

An Indian, who was arrested and deported in June 2017 for fraud and other offenses, has sued the Interior Minister, Ambrose Dery and the Director of Immigration, Kwame Takyi.

Ashok Kumar Sivaram insists his deportation was illegal, unfair and an abuse of office by the officers in charge of the deportation and demands a return.

He has consequently filed a suit through his Lawyer Gary Nimako requesting the court to annul the deportation order and for the two respondents to facilitate his return to Ghana.

In the suit, the applicant is also asking the Interior Minister and the Director of Immigration to restore his work permit once he is back in Ghana.

Ashok Sivaram, was involved in a legal battle with a business partner, Sachin Nambeear, who was a Director, 50% Shareholder of Jai Mai Communications Limited.

Sachin Nambeear, filed a suit on January 24, 2017, at the High Court, Commercial Division 7, against Ashok Sivaram accusing him of breaking his fiduciary duties to the company and demanding damages for same.

On May 5, 2017, the High Court, Commercial Division, appointed Messrs Ernst & Young to go into the account of Jai Mai Communications Limited, for the purposes of valuing the assets of the Company, monies, its liabilities.

Even before the valuation will be completed, Ashok Sivaram was arrested by CEPS officials and deported on June 1, 2017, with an order from the Interior Ministry.

But the applicant insists the act was unconstitutional.

His lawyer, Gary Nimako argued in the suit that his client could not have been deported merely on the basis and suspicion of forging a marriage certificate to acquire Ghanaian citizenship.

He said except the court which is clothed with the power to determine acts of fraud, it did not lie with the Interior Minister to declare his client as fraudulent and proceed to deport him.

“That fraud can only be established by a Court of Law after evidence of same has been led and proof thereof established beyond reasonable doubt.

“That the conclusion by the 1st Respondent that the “continued presence of Ashok Kumar Sivaram was not conducive to the public good” was not backed by any evidential proof and thereby amounted to a gross abuse of the exercise of discretionary power vested in the 1st Respondent.

“That the Deportation Order was not backed by any Executive Instrument and thereby the said Deportation was unlawful.

“That the Respondents’ decision to deport the Applicant was not fair and that as administrative officials, they were enjoined by the 1992 Constitution to act fairly, reasonably and comply with the requirements imposed on them by law.

“That the 1st Respondent in exercising his discretion to deport the Applicant ought to have been fair and candid in the exercise of that power.

“That this Honourable Court has the supervisory jurisdiction to ensure that administrative officials exercised their powers legally, that is within the confines of the law.

Please follow and like us:

Share
#

Write a comment

10+5 = ?