Mr. Vincent Kizito Beyuo
[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he lead Counsel of the General Legal Council (GLC) has argued that the Disciplinary Committee of the [ads1]Council is a court.
Mr. Beyuo made this assertion when he was arguing against the Application filed by Renowned Human Rights Lawyer for a Stay and or suspension of his ban by the GLC pending the determination of his appeal.
The application was moved and argued today, 11th July, 2017 by Lawyer Sam Coudjoe, the lead lawyer for Francis-Xavier Sosu.
Lawyer Sam Coudjoe among others argued that despite the fact that his client pleaded guilty to both charges of Touting and Overestimation of Legal fees, it is instructive to know that the charge of “grave misconduct in a professional respect” did not exist in our laws. He argued further that, in the case of Overestimation of Legal fees, even if the charges were properly laid and Mr. Sosu properly convicted, under Act 32, the only punishment available was a fine or refund and not suspension.
With regards to the Touting charge, in addition to the charge not being proper and non-existing in law, Lawyer Coudjoe argued that the GLC constituted itself into a Complainant, a prosecutor and a judge in its own court which violated the rules of natural justice.
With reference to reasons for the Stay and suspension of the decision of the GLC, Lawyer Sam argued that, “if the decision is not stayed the Applicant will suffer loses which cannot be compensated for”. On the contrary when the appeal fails, the applicant can always serve the sentence imposed on him”
In his response to the Affidavit in Opposition by the GLC, Lawyer Sam Coudjoe said the Appeal filed by Lawyer Sosu is legally competent because under the Court of Appeal Rules, Appeals must be filed in “courts” below. According to him because the decision of the Disciplinary Committee of the General Legal Council had the effect of a High Court decision, the appeal was filed in the High Court. He argued that the High Court with a Registrar that can issue various statutory forms was the appropriate place that the appeal aught to have been lodged.
He added that in any event, on the day of the filing of the appeal, Mr. Sosu first went to the GLC where he was turned away, before he went to the Court of Appeal and finally ended up filing the process at the High Court which by law is the appropriate place for the Notice.
Lawyer Beyou arguing against the Application said it was wrong for lawyer for Mr. Sosu to say the GLC did not have registry and to say the GLC is not a Court. The GLC is a court, he insisted.
Without touching on the substance of the application, lawyer for the GLC relied heavily on technicalities and argued forcefully that, there was no valid appeal pending because the said Notice of Appeal should have been filed at the GLC. He again argued in the alternative that, in the event that the Court of Appeal comes to the conclusion that there is a valid appeal, then the Application for Stay should have been first filed at the High Court.
In reply Lawyer Sam Coudjo insisted that there is a valid appeal, and citing cases like Aboagye Dacosta, and Amafio vrs. GLC said the court of appeal’s jurisdiction was properly invoked and the Stay can be granted.
The Court of Appeal, presided over by Justice Henry Anthony Kwofie (JA), ordered that the matter be adjourned to Wednesday, 26th July, 2017 for his ruling.
Source : Efo Korsi Senyo, Awake news
