Check out why UG wants Justice Obiri removed from the Commonwealth Hall case
Per its Notice on Motion for Certiorari, the University of Ghana avers that the trial judge, Justice Obiri even though was attached to the Akuafo Hall when he was at the University of Ghana, was a resident of the Commonwealth Hall
The University of Ghana has invoked the Supervisory Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court seeking the apex court to among others prohibit His Lorsdhip Obiri J from sitting on their substantive case against 169 residents of the Commonwealth Hall of the university.
Additionally, the University per its affidavit in support of the motion deposed to by the Registrar, Gordon Akanzuwine is also seeking to quash a February 9 order for an injunction issued by the judge against the school and an order of injunction restraining the High Court from enforcing the same.
Among the host of issues raised in its motion, the University notes that even though it filed a motion for Leave to Cross-examine Lawrence Edinam Egleh, the deponent of the Affidavit in support of the case of the Hall, the sitting judge declined to allow them to move the motion but rather went ahead to rule on the Motion for Interlocutory injunction.
The High Court presided over by Justice Obiri, granted a Motion for Interlocutory injunction in favor of the affiliates of the Commonwealth Hall against the residential policy decision of the University.
This decision was made after a group of affiliates and students of the Commonwealth Hall challenged at the High Court, the University’s decision to prevent them from residing at the Hall.
Per its Notice on Motion for Certiorari, the University of Ghana avers that the trial judge, Justice Obiri even though was attached to the Akuafo Hall when he was at the University of Ghana, was a resident of the Commonwealth Hall.
Furthermore, it adds that Justice Obiri was the lead assistant of the then Chief Vandal, a very revered office of Vandals thus Chief Korea.
As a result, the University notes that the impartiality of the judge in the matter in which Vandals are deeply invested cannot be assured.
In summary, the University avers that Justice Obiri, in the present case has conducted himself in a manner that suggests bias or the real likelihood of bias including;
The ruling of the court granting the application for an injunction did not appear to consider at all any of the facts and issues raised by them
The order of injunction restraining the university from implementing a decision that had not been taken
The very short time afforded them to file its affidavit in opposition to the Application for an injunction
The undue delay in providing the injunction ruling of the court despite its constant checks and requests
