Lawyer and Business Strategist, David Ofori-Dorte, has warned against discouraging aggrieved bondholders from taking their case to court.

According to him, demoralizing aggrieved bondholders from presenting their cases to the court would lead to pent up frustrations which could culminate into disastrous outcomes for the society.

His concern follows the Finance Ministry’s cautioning of individual bondholders who refuse to take the Amended and Restated Exchange Memorandum under the debt exchange programme that they will find it difficult to obtain judgement against the government.

Under a caption labeled “Enforcement of Civil Liabilities” in the 58 page Amended and Restated Exchange Memorandum to individual bondholders, Finance Minister, Ken Ofori-Atta, emphasised that since Ghana is a sovereign state, any legal action taken by bondholders against the country would be difficult to materialise.

The statement, however, waived immunity from execution or attachment in respect of certain of its assets under its “Terms and Conditions of the New Bonds—Governing Law, Submission to Jurisdiction and Waiver of Immunity”.

In reaction to this, Mr. Ofori-Dorte noted that aggrieved bondholders have a right to test the law in court and must be allowed to do so if they so wish.

“A contract has certain principles for it to be able to become a contract. But no contract can be enforced if it’s illegal. What if you went to court and a judge declared that, that very clause you’re talking about is void for illegality as an example, notwithstanding that you entered into it. I’m not saying that, that is what will happen.

“The point I’m making is there’s a public policy principle I want us to avoid; that public policy principle is the situation where anybody, it doesn’t matter who, will deny the individual the ability to go to court and seek redress even if he will lose. Give them that chance. Don’t prevent people from going,” he said on JoyNews’ PM Express Business Edition.

He further explained that “Our constitution under both the directive principle of state policy and throughout article 20 draws attention to our economic right, and the right of a person’s asset not to be expropriated. If for example you deny me my principal, essentially are you not denying me my right to my asset?

“So it becomes a constitutional issue as to whether you will go to the supreme court for interpretation or whatever, that’s another matter. I want to emphasise that no lawyer will ever tell anybody that don’t go to court. I’m not advising anybody to go to court either.”

“I’m more concerned about the first approach many people take, ‘don’t go to court, you will lose etc,’ because it makes people frustrated and the opposite of ‘don’t go to court, you will lose’ is very dangerous for the society. I think we should avoid that…let them go and leave the judges to decide,” he said.