Re BOOK ALERT: 
Welcome
....to JusticeGhana Group
JusticeGhana is a Non-Governmental [and-not-for- profit] Organization (NGO) with a strong belief in Justice, Security and Progress....” More Details
Akufo-Addo, Lee Kwan Yew Were Law Mates - Ayikoi Otoo
- Details
- Parent Category: Main
- Category: Briefs & Memos
- Created on Tuesday, 07 May 2013 00:00
- Hits: 7631
Akufo-Addo, Lee Kwan Yew Were Law Mates - Ayikoi Otoo
Former Attorney General Nii Ayikoi Otoo has said there is information suggesting that the 2012 presidential candidate of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, was called to the bar the same year former Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Kwan Yew, was.
Nii Ayikoi Otoo told Radio XYZ’s current affairs programme The Analyst last Saturday that: “There is no doubt at all that Nana Akufo-Addo was called to the Bar in England; People have published it even on Facebook and there was one guy who said when he checked he even realized that he was called to the bar together with Lee Kwan Yew, the same year that he was called to the bar”.
Former Supreme Court judge, Justice Francis Yaonasu Kpegah filed a writ against Nana Akufo-Addo at the Fast Track Division of the Accra High Court on March 19, 2013 challenging the former presidential candidate’s law credentials.Justice Kpegah claimed Nana Akufo-Addo was holding himself out as a lawyer when evidence available to him indicated that he was never called to the Ghana Bar.
He additionally alleged that Nana Akufo-Addo was impersonating one W.A.D. Akufo-Addo.
The retired judge, in his statement of claim, also accused former President John Agyekum Kufuor of complicity when, according to him, Mr Kufuor’s government knew or ought to have known that Nana Akufo-Addo was not on the roll of lawyers and yet appointed him as Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, who by the provisions of the 1992 Constitution must be a lawyer in good standing.
But the court dismissed the case on Thursday, May 2, 2013 following an application by Nana Akufo-Addo’s lawyers that the writ be struck out on grounds that it was scandalous, frivolous, vexacious and an abuse of the court process.
According to the court, the defendant’s evidence vis-a-vis the plaintiff’s failure to file an affidavit in opposition justified a dismissal of the case.
Source: The Finder
