Plaintiffs calls for strict adherence to court ruling

    

Petitioners

      

Plaintiffs that took civil action over the siting of the capital for the newly created Binduri District have threatened another legal suit against some local actors for contempt of court for the ruling on the matter. On January this year, the Human Rights Division of the Supreme Court ruled in the matter on where to site the district capital of the Binduri District. The ruling was that the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development, MLGRD, should move the temporal structures of the district assembly presently located at Bazua to Binduri not later than July 31, in compliance with section 3(2) of the Local Government Act 1993, Act 462. The ruling also directed that as per the terms of agreement, the permanent offices of the District Assembly shall be located at Binduri when government is ready with the resources to put up offices. A four- member committee was later instituted by the Upper East Regional Coordinating Council to ensure that the terms of agreement are adhered to the latter. At a recent stakeholders meeting held at the RCC, the committee headed by the Paramount Chief of the Chiana Traditional Area, Pe Ayagitam III, presented a report that suggested that the capital for the Binduri District be sited at Binguri.  The plaintiffs consider the report as invalid since it was against the constitutional provision of the court order.  This, is because, the MLGRD last February sent a directive to the RCC urging them to move the capital from Bazua to Binduri. They say committee’s report, cannot supersede the court ruling.  At a press conference to express their grievance, the lead petitioner, Philip Ayamba, told Radio Ghana that the people of Binduri are ready to ensure the strict adherence of the court ruling and warned that should there be any breach of peace, the local actors involved, especially the  RCC, the DCE and members of the committee will be liable.  In reaction, the DCE for Binduri, Daniel Akologo, told Radio Ghana that the committees report cannot supersede the Supreme Court’s ruling because Binguri is one of the 8 communities that make up the Binduri District. Therefore citing the capital in Binguri which is the seat of the Binduri chief was appropriate unless the plaintiffs have a hidden interest. He explained that the composition of the 4-member committee are respectable  and competent individuals who cannot flout the decision of the  court ruling bearing in mind  the implications and called on the plaintiffs to reconsider their decision since they are bound to fail again.

GBC                                                    END                                                       AS/IA/VABE