The Accra Fast Track High Court has fixed Tuesday, November 4, 2008 to decide whether or not to stay execution of its judgement which outlawed private lotto operation in the country. The Ghana Lotto Operators Association (GLOA) and six others filed for stay of execution of the court's decision pending the determination of an appeal against the banning of their operations. The GLOA and the other plaintiffs, namely, Obiri Asare and Sons Limited, Rambel Enterprises Limited, Dan Multipurpose Trading Enterprise Limited, Agrop Association Limited, Star Lotto Limited and From-Home Enterprises, had sought to question the constitutionality of the National Lottery Authority (NLA) Act 2006, Act 722. They had, therefore, prayed for a declaration that the directive from the NLA to private lotto operators to surrender machines or equipment used for the operation of lottery to the director-general by August 14, 2007 was unconstitutional, illegal and unreasonable. But the court held otherwise. At the court's hearing in Accra on Wednesday, the Presiding Judge, Mr Justice K. A. Ofori-Atta, fixed the date after it had been informed that the necessary papers had been filed by parties in the matter. The court had enquired from counsel for the NLA, Mr Kizito Beyuo, whether or not the necessary papers had been filed, to which counsel answered in the affirmative. Counsel had prayed the court to give a short adjournment to make it possible for the plaintiffs to be served a hearing notice to the effect that the matter had been transferred from Mr Justice Edward Asante's court to Mr Justice Ofori-Atta's. According to counsel, the plaintiffs appeared to be unwilling to move their application for stay of execution. There was no representation for the plaintiffs at Mr Justice Ofori-Atta's court. Earlier, counsel for the plaintiffs, Mr Aurelius Awuku, had gone to Mr Justice Asante's court to move the application on behalf of his clients but he had been informed by court clerks that the judge was on vacation. He then took a date for November 6, 2008 and left the court premises. Some few minutes later, Mr Beyuo appeared at the court premises and entered Mr Justice Ofori-Atta's court. Counsel then prayed the court to give a short adjournment to make it possible for the plaintiffs to be notified of the transfer of the ease from Mr Justice Asante's court. Plaintiff/appellants stated in their motion for stay of execution that the judgement banning their operation was "wrong in law and an improper exercise of discretion". According to the plaintiffs, "the subsequent dismissal of our action raises serious questions of law and fact which will have to be considered by the appellate court". An affidavit in support of their motion for stay of execution stated that the ruling of the Fast Track High Court had the potential of folding up the business of the plaintiffs which, it said, "would be irreparable in the likely event that the appellate court reverses the wrongful ruling". It said the appeal, which was likely to succeed, touched on the fundamental human rights of the plaintiffs and accordingly prayed the court to restrain the NLA from interfering with the work or property rights of the plaintiffs, pending the determination of the appeal. According to the plaintiffs, the Supreme Court recognised that they were not at the mercy of the state in seeking to participate in the state-regulated lottery industry. They further stated that the trial judge failed in his duty to give them a fair hearing in a case involving serious issues of fact and several pieces of evidence. The appellants are, therefore, praying for an order to set aside the ruling of the trial court, as well as an order to restore the plaintiffs/appellants' action for it to be detem1ined on the merits after a proper hearing. However, the NLA counsel has stated that the matter had been determined by the Supreme Court, which ruled that the Lotto Act was constitutional. Mr Kizito said the Fast Track High Court acted properly in accordance with the Supreme Court ruling. Counsel said the plaintiff/appellants claim for compensation was not put before the court at all and for that matter it was improper for the plaintiffs/appellants to raise it in the first place. The Fast Track High Court's judgement banning private lotto followed an application filed by the NLA, which prayed the court to dismiss the plaintiffs' suit on the premise that the Supreme Court had declared the Lotto Act constitutional and for that reason there was no basis for the substantive suit to continue at the lower court. Source: Daily Graphic