GOREGE BOSOMPEM AMOFA vs THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE & ors
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP DENNIS ADJEI, J. A
Areas of Law
- Employment Law
- Administrative Law
- Evidence Law
- Constitutional Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Plaintiff, an inspector in the Ghana Police Service, was dismissed following an incident where he shot a suspect who later died. He challenged his dismissal, arguing the Police Service Enquiry was constituted under the wrong enactment. The court examined various issues including the lawfulness of his actions, the procedures followed by the Defendants, and whether his dismissal was fair and reasonable. The court found that the enquiry was correctly constituted under the appropriate regulation, procedural delays did not render the proceedings void, and there was no failure of fairness or reasonableness by the Defendants. The Plaintiff's claims were dismissed, and the court upheld his dismissal.
The Plaintiff took this action against the Defendants claiming for the following reliefs: “a. A declaration that the Plaintiff’s dismissal by 2nd Defendant was unlawful.
b. An order directed at Defendants to re-instate the plaintiff into his employment, position and rant with 2nd Defendant with full benefits and entitlement.
c. An order directed at the Defendant to pay to the plaintiff his salary arrears from February 2013 till the date he is re-instated.
d. An injunction restraining the Defendants from his ejecting the plaintiff from his accommodation.
e. Damages from wrongful dismissal f. Costs inclusive of legal fees. ”The brief undisputed facts of the case are that the Plaintiff was an inspector in the Ghana Police Service.
He was recruited into the Police Service on 1st March, 1984 until he was dismissed by the 1st Defendant on 19th February, 2013. The basis for the dismissal for the Plaintiff was that on 20th September, 2011 he went with a team of investigators to arrest one Yaw Acheampong under a superior order.
The suspect who decided to escape arrest by the police sat in a taxi cap upon hearing of the presence of the police.
The suspect, sensing danger that he may be arrested by the police jumped from the taxi cap into a nearby bush.
The Plaintiff then shot the suspect with a gun.
The suspect eventually died while on admission at the hospital.
The Attorney-General advised against prosecution of the plaintiff.
The police therefore constituted Police Service Enquiry which found the Plaintiff liable.
Upon the recommendation of the Police Officer who presided over by the Police Enquiry, the Plaintiff was dismissed from the Police Service.
The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the reasons for his dismissal and the law under which the Police Enquiry was set up brought this suit for the Police enquiry proceedings, which is the foundation of his dismissal to be declared null and void.
The Defendants on the other hand resisted the Plaintiff’s claim and justified his dismissal that he acted unprofessionally for giving warning shots and shooting the suspect who had not been convicted for having committed any offence.
The following issues were set down at the application for directions to regulate the conduct of the case.
The issues are as follows: “a. Whether it was unlawful or a misconduct for the plaintiff to have fired a warning shots in order to apprehend a felony suspects? b. Whether the force used by the Plaintiff in apprehending the suspect