One of the accused judges alleged to have taken bribes in the Anas Aremeyaw Anas’ investigative piece, Justice Paul Dery, has filed a contempt suit against the International Conference Centre and UTV.
The suit comes a day after the video put together by Anas and his Tigereyepi team, was premiered at the Accra International Conference Centre (AICC) despite a pending interlocutory injunction to stop the facility from screening it.
Justice Dery’s lawyer, Nii Kpakpo Samoa Addo had on Tuesday withdrawn an application for interlocutory injunction against Anas and Tigereyepi from airing the video but that against the AICC was maintained.
United Television, popularly known as UTV is joined in the latest contempt suit for showing portions of the video in their news on Tuesday night.The second part of the viewing continues at the AICC today, Wednesday at 4:00pm and 8:00pm respectively.
This is fourth suit filed by Justice Dery since his name came up as one of the judges in the video.
He is also said to be heading to the Supreme Court to get Anas’ petition to the Chief Justice and the Judicial Council, “nullified.”
Below is a copy of the affidavit in support of the motion
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION ON NOTICE FOR COMMITTAL FOR CONTEMPT PURSUANT TO ORDER 50 R1 (2) OF C.I. 47
I, His Lordship, Paul Uuter Dery of Unnumbered House, Spintex Road, Accra, do hereby make oath and say as follows:
1. That I am the Applicant herein and the deponent hereto.
3. That the 1st Respondent is the Manager of the Accra International Conference Centre, Osu, Accra.
4. That the 2nd Respondent is the Station Manager of the United Television Station in Accra.
5. That on the 16th of September, 2015, I caused a Writ of Summons to be issued from the Registry of this Honourable Court titled His Lordship Justice Paul Uuter Dery v. 1. The Director of Estates and General Services Bureau, Ministry of Foreign Affairs 2. The Chief Director, Ministry of Foreign Affairs 3. The Manager, Accra International Conference Centre 4. The Attorney General, prohibiting the Defendants therein from prejudicing my case by making their Accra International Conference Centre facility available to Tigereyepi and its Media Partners. (Please, find attached and exhibited as “PUD 1” a copy of the said suit).
6. That the 1st Respondent herein is the 3rd Defendant in the above mentioned Suit.
7. That the Defendants in the said Suit including the Respondent herein were served with the said Writ on the 16th of September, 2015. (Please, find attached and exhibited as “PUD2” a copy of the proof of service).
8. That on the 22nd of September, 2015, I also filed an Interlocutory Injunction against the Defendants in the above mentioned suit seeking to restrain the Defendants from making the Accra International Conference Centre available to Tigereyepi and its Media Partners for the screening of the alleged audio visual recordings. (Please, find attached and exhibited as “PUD3” a copy of the Interlocutory Injunction).
9. That the 1st Respondent herein, who is the 3rd Defendant in the said suit was served with the said Interlocutory Injunction on the 22nd of September, 2015. (Please, find attached and exhibited as “PUD4” a copy of the proof of service).
10. That notwithstanding, the 1st Respondent having been served with the said Interlocutory Injunction, the 1st Respondent went ahead to make the Accra International Conference Centre available to Tigereyepi and its Media Partners, blatantly disregarding, undermining and prejudicing the authority of this Honourable Court.
11. That the 2nd Respondent was issued a letter dated the 15th of September , 2015 and received by one Rosemond Kankam on the 16th of September, 2015 notifying it of the pending suit against Tigereye PI, Chief Justice of the Republic of Ghana and the Attorney General. (Please, find attached and exhibited as “PUD5” a copy of the said letter).
12. That even after receiving the letter dated the 15th of September, 2015, the 2nd Respondent on the 22nd of September, 2015, at around 10 pm aired contents of the audio visual recording on its television station, United Television.
13. That the Respondents have knowledge of the pendency of my actions before the court.
14. That the Respondents’ conduct is calculated to bring the authority and administration of the law into disrespect and disregard and to interfere with the course of justice.
15. That the 1st Respondent’s act of making the Accra International Conference Centre available to Tigereyepi and its Media Partners for the public screening of the alleged audio visual recordings on the 22nd of September, 2015, seeks to prejudice the fair trial of the case and that singular act amounts to contempt of Court.
16. That the 2nd Respondent’s act of telecasting the contents of the audio visual recording to the public seeks to prejudice the fair trial of the case and that singular act mounts to contempt of Court.
17. That the Respondents’ conduct is in bad faith, is malicious and is prejudicial to the determination of the case before the court.
18. In the circumstances, I pray that this obvious disregard to the Court amounts to nothing more than contempt of Court of which the Respondents ought to be convicted and punished.
