Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order Restraining #Fixthecountry Movement From Demonstrating

The Supreme Court has set aside a High Court order that restrained indefinitely conveners and protestors of Fixthecountry from embarking on street demonstration.

According to a five member panel presided over by Justice Yaw Apau, the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction when it restrained the conveners and protestors of Fixthecountry indefinitely.

The apex court of the land therefore quashed the High court’s order.

It noted that under the Order 25 Rule 9 of CI 47, an ex-parte was to elapse after 10 days but the High Court order portrayed that the fixthecountry conveners had been restrained indefinitely and that that until the President lifts the ban on public gathering, there cannot be any demonstration by the conveners.

The court delivered its decision after Justice Srem Sai, lawyer for the fixthecountry, had gone to the apex court of the land praying for an order of certiorari directed to the High Court (Criminal Division) to quash its order dated on May 6, this year.

On May 6, this year the High Court presided over by Justice Ruby Aryeetey restrained the conveners of fixthecountry indefinitely from public demonstration.

The movement was to hit the streets on May 9, this year over hardships bedeviling the country.

The Supreme Court however refused to grant the second leg of the Fixthecountry movement grounds which sought for an “order restraining the Ghana Police Service, the second interested party or agents assigns, workmen or workwomen however described or styled from unlawfully interfering with the constitutional right of the conveners of the Fixthecountry public demonstration and applicant herein to embark on a public demonstration.”

Earlier in an argument before the Supreme Court, Justice Srem Sai argued that the High Court’s order was interim and not absolute.

Attorney General Godfred Yeboah Dame, opposed to the application of the movement, saying presently there was no order in force to be quashed by the Supreme Court.

Mr. Dame submitted that Order 25 rule 9 of CI 47 orders made ex-parte elapsed after 10 days, noting that the May 6 order by the High Court had long elapsed and that there was nothing before the court.

He told the court that the application of the movement was misconceived and incompetent hence same must be dismissed.

According to him, the second interested party that is the Inspector General of Police had filed another application on notice and the movement was yet to be served.

Other members on the five member panel are: Justices Lovelace Johnson, Mariama Owusu, Prof. Henrietta Mensa- Bonsu and C.J Hoenyenugah. GNA