Nine Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) have dragged the Attorney-General to the Supreme Court in a move seeking to challenge President Akufo-Addo’s decision directing the Auditor General, Daniel Domelevo to proceed on leave.

They are the Ghana Centre for Democratic Development, Ghana Integrity Initiative, Citizen Ghana Movement, Africa Center for Energy Policy (ACEP), Parliamentary Network Africa, Penplusbytes, Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA), SEND Ghana and One Ghana Movement.

They are asking the Apex court to rule that the directive issued by the Presidency asking Mr. Domelevo to proceed on leave is inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the constitution.

They also want the court to declare that the appointment or designation of Johnson Akuamoah Asiedu as “Acting Auditor-General” is void and of no legal effect.

This is the second suit to hit Government on this leave saga.

CDD Fellow in Public Law and Justice Prof Stephen Asare is also in the Supreme Court seeking similar reliefs.

Background

The Office of the President on July 4 extended the leave period of the Auditor-General, Daniel Domelevo from 123 days to 167 effective July 1, 2020.

This came in the wake of concerns raised by Mr Domelevo over the directive to take his accumulated leave because his work, according to him, is causing an embarrassment to the government.

A letter by Mr Domelevo dated July 3, 2020, outlined a series of reasons why he believes the directive leaves much to be desired including what he described as bad faith on the part of the Presidency.”

CSOs case

The CSOs are represented in court by renowned lawyer Martin Kpebu of GT Legal.

In 90 pages, Mr. Kpebu presents the case of the CSOs on the legal capacity of the CSOs to file the suit, their reliefs, facts of the case, legal arguments among others.

He contends that Article 2(1) of the 1992 constitution empowers the groups to come together to file such a writ.

This constitutional provision reads:

“1) A person who alleges that –

(a) An enactment or anything contained in or done under the authority of that or any other enactment; or

(b) Any act or omission of any person, is inconsistent with, or is in contravention of a provision of this Constitution, may bring an action in the Supreme Court for a declaration to that effect.”

The Office of Auditor-General is described in the writ as an “Independent Constitutional Office” that is not subject to the control of the President in such a manner.

Mr Kpebu argues that the Auditor-General’s entitlement to leave is in the character of a right and does not give rise to an enforceable legal obligation.