Deported Indian drags Dery to court
Ashok Kumar Sivaram, an Indian businessman who was deported from Ghana on June 1, 2017, upon a directive issued to the Ghana Immigration Service (GIS) by the country’s Interior Minister Ambrose Dery, has filed a suit in court to demand redress.
Also named as a respondent in the suit is Kwame Takyi, the Director/Comptroller of the GIS.
According to claims contained in the application filed at the High Court, the lawyers of the aggrieved deportee indicated that the repatriation order is without basis.
“The Applicant was deported from Ghana on the said morning of 1st June 2017 without any notice to him or being offered the opportunity to be heard on the allegation of forgery leveled against him.
“The Respondents carried out this operation without regard to the presence of the Applicant’s business interest in Ghana that employs one hundred and sixty (160) people out of which one hundred and thirty (130) are Ghanaians and thirty (30) are Expatriates. Again, no regard or consideration was given by the Respondents in spite of the pendency of the case in the High Court, Commercial Division and the Order for a valuation process to be undertaken by Ernst & Young to enable the Court proceed with the matter pending before it,” a letter attached to the writ by the lawyers, led by Gary Nimarko, explained.
“Respectfully My Lord, it appears that issuance of Executive Instrument by the 1st Respondent prior to deportation of an alien is permissive under the Act but it is worth pointing out that Deportation Orders of an Alien subject to Deportation is backed by Executive Instrument. In the case of this Applicant, no Executive Instrument was issued by the 1st Respondent in respect of the Deportation Order.
“My Lord, it is also worth pointing out that the Applicant was in Ghana as a Residence/Work Permit holder and has since been on that status until the permit was cancelled on 1st June, 2017 and immediately deported from Ghana.
“My Lord, the Applicant was not in Ghana on the basis of an alleged fraudulent Marriage Certificate which the 1st Respondent is claiming that was submitted for Registration as a Ghanaian citizen. As a matter of fact, there is no record of the Applicant having involved himself in a criminal enterprise in Ghana since he started coming into the country from the year “2000 for which the 1st Respondent says that his presence in Ghana is “not conducive to the public good.”
“A closer reading of the Deportation Order makes it clear that the 1st Respondent came to the conclusion that the Applicant’s presence in Ghana was not conducive to the public good after having made a judicial determination that the Applicant has submitted a forged Marriage Certificate in support of his application for citizenship and that, that act is fraudulent and criminal.
“Respectfully My Lord, we are at a loss as to whether the 1st Respondent has the jurisdiction to determine fraud within the powers vested in him under the Immigration Act 2000, (Act 547).
“My Lord, it is our humble submission that the determination of fraud can only be established by this Honourable Court. My Lord, it is further our submission that the determination of fraud by the 1st Respondent was clearly in excess of his jurisdiction and that act by the 1st Respondent is amenable to be quashed by Certiorari,” the letter further indicated.