#AUCCDecides: AUCC Chief Justice dismisses petition challenging disqualification of three aspirants.

The Judicial Council the African University College of Communications led by Chief Justice Nana Agyenim Boateng in a unanimous decision has dismissed a petition challenging the disqualification of three aspirants in the upcoming SRC elections scheduled for tomorrow 31st August 2021.

The three aspirants Patience Hammond – Aspiring Women’s Commissioner, Akwasi Mfum – Aspiring External Affairs Officer and Alidu Mohammed Nasir-Deen – Aspiring Financial Secretary through their counsel Gideon Zor petitioned to the CJ to quash the vetting results of the electoral. The three argued that outcome of the vetting results flies in the face of the SRC constitution insisting the three disqualified aspirants met the criteria as set out in the constitution.

Following the disqualification of the aspirants, there’s been massive uproar among some students who are demanding the immediate suspension of the elections.

But the Judicial Council in its ruling argues that there’s no merit in the petition filed against the EC “Petitioner for the petition brought before us is not a candidate and has no direct interest thus, the vetting report could not have affected him.”

In the view of the Council “Pursuant to Article 21(8) of the AUCC SRC Constitution the petitioner to bring forth such a petition shall be a candidate.  And added that a candidate who is affected by the vetting committee decision shall have 24hours in which to appeal to the Judicial Council”

The Council proceeded to “dismiss the petition outrightly on the above stated grounds and advice the counsel to do the needful and meet necessary criteria for qualification of the petition if it wants to be heard”

Below is a copy of the ruling by the Judicial Council

IN THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF JUDICATURE, THE HIGHEST COURT ON AUCC CAMPUS SITTING ON MONDAY THE 30TH OF AUGUST, 2021.

CORAM : NANA AGYENIM BOATENG (CJ) (PRESIDING), FRANCIS EKOW ANNAG, THERESA ADEZEWAA
AYITTEY , GOLDBERG-GRIMM LEKETTEY COURAGE HOPE, ALBERT KUSI JJ.JC)

WRIT
NO. SRCJ1/08/2021

ARTICLE 21(8) OF THE AUCC SRC CONSTITUTION, 2012 .

SRC VETTING COMMITTEE PETITION HELD ON 27-28 DAY OF AUGUST, 2021.
PARTIES : PETITIONER PRESENT
GIDEON ZOR
COUNSEL : GIDEON ZOR
___________________________________________________________

Counsel for the petitioner invokes article 21(8) of the AUCC SRC Constitution challenging the results published by the vetting committee
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

At a sitting on Monday, 30th Day of August, 2021 by the justices of the Judicial Council to establish the merit or otherwise of the petition brought before it on the 29th Day of August, 2021, Article 31(13) of the AUCC SRC Constitution was prayed to for the reliance of Judicial Council members of the 2019/2020 Academic year their names herein aforementioned as Justices.

OUTCOME
By unanimous decision the Judicial Council does not find the petition worth examining thus, the petition is outrightly Dissmised as not qualifying to be a petition.

GROUNDS
Pursuant to Article 21(8) of the AUCC SRC Constitution the petitioner to bring forth such a petition shall be a candidate.

“A candidate who is affected by the vetting committee decision shall have 24hours in which to appeal to the Judicial Council”

The Petitioner for the petition brought before us is not a candidate and has no direct interest thus, the vetting report could not have affected him.

In the first paragraph of the petition brought before us, it reads “I act for and on behalf of TEAM KEKELI and has the firm instruction of the team to petition on behalf of the disqualified aspiring SRC Executives (Herein referred to as petitioners”) However, the said petition was given in the hand of one Gideon Zor, the petitioner who also doubles as the counsel to the petition.

On the phase of the petition it is clearly jumbled with whom the petitioner is and thus, a jumble petition about the petitioner cannot be heard by Judicial Council.

CONCLUSION
The Judicial Council dismisses the petition outrightly on the above stated grounds. We advice the counsel to do the needful and meet necessary criteria for qualification of the petition if it wants to be heard.

NANA AGYENIM BOATENG -CHIEF JUSTICE, AUCC SRC

FRANCIS EKOW ANNAN- JUSTICE OF THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL, AUCC SRC

THERESA ADEZEWAA AYITTEY- JUSTICE OF THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL, AUCC SRC

GOLDBERG-GRIMM LEKETTEY COURAGE HOPE- JUSTICE OF THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL, AUCC SRC

ALBERT KUSI- JUSTICE OF THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL, AUCC SRC

Delivered by; NANA AGYENIM BOATENG- CHIEF JUSTICE, AUCC SRC

Cc: SRC PRESIDENT
DIRECTOR OF STUDENTS AFFAIRS
ELECTORAL COMMISSION, AUCC SRC
PETITIONER

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here