GIFTY MAWUENYEGA-TEHODA VS THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE & ANOR
2017
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE GIFTY AGYEI ADDO
Areas of Law
- Human rights Law
- Employment Law
- Constitutional Law
- Tort Law
- Evidence Law
2017
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Justice Gifty Agyei Addo of the High Court adjudicated a suit by a Ghana Police Service officer who sought redress for unlawful detention by the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI), malicious prosecution, and wrongful dismissal. The Court found, based on unchallenged testimony and constitutional requirements, that the officer was detained unlawfully between 29 December 2011 and 12 January 2012 and again from 13 to 17 January 2012, and awarded GH a25,000 compensation under Article 14(5). On the employment claim, the Court held that the disciplinary enquiry proceeded without notice or opportunity to be heard, breaching natural justice, set aside the dismissal, ordered reinstatement with restoration of promotions and salaries, and awarded GH a210,000 general damages. The malicious prosecution claim failed because the criminal case was struck out for want of prosecution rather than terminating in her favor by acquittal. The Court also rejected a declaration against the Attorney-Generals authority to prosecute, and awarded costs of GH a28,000.
By her Originating Motion filed on 10th September, 2012, the Plaintiff before this Court applied for the enforcement of her fundamental human rights under Article 33 (1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, 1992 and Order 67 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2014 (C. I 47). The action as instituted was against the Inspector General of Police (IGP), the Trial Officer National Police Headquarters, The Director General, Bureau of National Investigations and the Attorney General as the first, second, third and fourth Respondents respectively.
On record is the Plaintiff’s action by a Writ of Summons accompanied by a Statement of Claim filed on 6th November, 2012, against the Attorney General and the Inspector General of Police as first and second Defendants respectively.
The record of proceedings indicate that the suit evidence was received by this Court in Suit Number HRC9/13, the same suit number on the Writ of Summons filed by the Plaintiff on 10th September, 2012 and distinct from suit number HRCM/361/12 founded on the Plaintiff’s Originating Motion of 10th September, 2012. The record is silent on these apparent originating processes.
In open court, I have sought clarification from Counsel and their claim is that the Originating Motion filed on 10th September, 2012, was struck out as withdrawn.
The action of the Plaintiff therefore survived per the Writ of Summons filed on 6th November, 2012. Per her Writ of Summons, the Plaintiff seeks from this Court the following reliefs: i. A declaration that the detention of the Plaintiff from 28th December, 2011 till 12 January, 2012 and from 13th till 17th January, 2012 is unlawful and violates her fundamental rights to liberty.
Compensation by way of damages for unlawful detention.
A declaration that the 1st Defendant has no basis in law and on facts to prosecute the Plaintiff.
Compensation by way of damages for malicious prosecution which resulted in the curtailment of Plaintiff’s rights to liberty for a total of 45 days in the BNI cells.
v. A declaration that the Plaintiff‘s dismissal was wrongful and unlawful; the same having been done in breach of the rules of Natural Justice.
An order setting aside the dismissal.
General damages for unlawful dismissal.
An order directing the Inspector General of Police to re-instate the Plaintiff into the Police Service and all promotions and salaries withheld from her restored to her.
Any other order(s) as may be deemed fit by this Court.
The Pla