Joseph Whittal, CHRAJ Commissioner

CHRAJ throws out 'declaration of assets' petition against Chief Justice Anin Yeboah

News Desk Report Politics May - 20 - 2020 , 19:16 2 minutes read

The Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) has dismissed the petition a private citizen, Mensah Thompson filed against the Chief Justice, Justice Kwasi Anin Yeboah on the declaration of assets and liabilities.

Mr Mensah Thompson, who is the Executive Director of the Alliance for Social Equity and Public Accountability (ASEPA) had argued that Justice Anin Yeboah did not declare his assets and liabilities as required by law when he became a Court of Appeal judge and subsequently a judge on the Supreme Court bench.

His complaint to CHRAJ was that Parliamentary approval of Justice Anin Yeboah as the Chief Justice prior to his vetting and approval by Parliament would have gone contrary to Article 286 of the 1992 constitution because he did not disclose his assets and liabilities as required by the 1992 constitution.

He argued that Justice Anin Yeboah had been a Justice of the Court of Appeal since 2008 and was required under the constitution of Ghana, to have declared his assets and liabilities but contended he did not do so.

But CHRAJ after investigating the matter in its report said the following:

Findings

At the end of the preliminary investigations the commission finds as a fact that the respondent has complied with Article 286 of the constitution by declaring his assets and liabilities to the Auditor-General.

Decision

Having found out that the respondent had declared his assets and liabilities at the time the allegations were made and having satisfied the conditions for holding that office then, all be it a late submission, what should be the appropriate action that the commissioner should take in respect of the results of the investigation?

The commission is of the considered view that having found that the respondent has complied with Article 286, the appropriate action in the circumstances would be to dismiss the complaint as overtaking, unsubstantiated, and not made out. The complaint is accordingly dismissed.

We must add however that the commission recognises that the schedule of a Justice of a Supreme Court and other high-ranking public officials can be very demanding and could sometimes accession lapses in some areas of their work. However, that is not to excuse a person indefinitely from his or her duty under the law.