Kwasi Afrifa files judicial review against GLC charges, amid CJ bribery allegations

    95

    The Kumasi based lawyer, Kwasi Afrifa who has accused the Chief Justice of being involved in a $5m bribe has filed a judicial review at a High Court in Accra. The Judicial Review follows nine counts of misconducts that were slapped against him by the General Legal Council.

    According to Mr. Afrifa in his statement of case which is now available to Dennislaw News, he received a complaint filed against him on the 8th of July 2021. The hearing of this complaint was to be done on 15th July, 2021. On this set date however, he arrived only to be informed that the “complainant had filed a further process dated 13th July 2021, in reaction to his response dated 8th July, 2021 which had not been served on him”.

    He noted that even after he drew the attention of the General Legal Council to this matter, indicating that the case was consequently “not ripe for hearing,” his pleadings were ignored and the 8-paged response was served to him “at the hearing and proceeded there and then to hold the preliminary inquiry without affording the Applicant an opportunity to apprise himself of the contents of the said process.”

    Mr. Afrifa also indicated that the “panel which heard the proceedings on 15th July 2021 was different from the one that read the charges to the Applicant on 29th July 2021. The 15th July 2021 panel which included Marful Sau JSC who was noticeably absent on the 29th of July 2021”.

    Lawyer Afrifa further averred that the proceedings of the Disciplinary Committee amounted to a breach of natural justice principles as he was not even aware of the entirety of the case brought against him.

    He also notes on page 6 of his statement of case that the General Legal Council “failed to follow its own rules by failing to serve the Applicant in accordance with its rules regarding the mode of service of complaints on lawyers as well as proceeding to fix a date to inquire into the complaint without first satisfying itself that the Applicant had been served particularly when the Respondent itself had failed to comply with its own rules regarding service”.

    He is consequently praying the court to “quash the proceedings of the Disciplinary Committee of the General Legal Council of 15th July 2021 and 29th July 2021, as they contain clear errors on the face of the record in addition to a multitude of legal and procedural improprieties”

    The Disciplinary Committee of the General Legal Council charged Mr. Afrifa on the following counts;

    COUNT 1

    STATEMENT OF MISCONDUCT

    Misconduct in a professional respect, contrary to rule 9(11) of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 1969 (LI. 613) as amended.

    PARTICULARS OF MISCONDUCT

    That you, having been informed of alleged unethical conduct in the office of the Chief Justice by your former client, Ogyeedom Obranu Kwasi Atta VI, the Complainant herein, failed to protect the sanctity and integrity of the legal profession by failing to disclose the allegation of bribery against the Chief Justice of the Republic of Ghana to the Disciplinary Committee of the Judicial Council or any other statutory body for an inquiry.

    COUNT 2

    STATEMENT OF MISCONDUCT

    Misconduct in a professional respect, contrary to rule 6(1) of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 1969 (II. 613) as amended.

    PARTICULARS OF MISCONDUCT

    That you, in a preliminary inquiry before the Disciplinary Committee of the General Legal Council voluntarily admitted that you failed to issue any receipts to your former client, Ogyeedom Obranu Kwasi Atta VI for the payment of legal fees thereby committing professional misconduct.

    COUNT 3

    STATEMENT OF MISCONDUCT

    Misconduct in a professional respect, contrary to rule 2(2) of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 1969 (L.I. 613) as amended.

    PARTICULARS OF MISCONDUCT

    That you, in a conversation with your former client, Ogyeedom Obranu Kwasi Atta VI about an alleged judicial manipulation by the Chief Justice of the Republic of Ghana, omitted to defend the reputation of the legal profession and rather facilitated the commission of the alleged bribery offense by refunding to the Complainant legal fees you were legally and duly entitled to thereby failing to uphold the dignity and high standing of the legal profession.

    COUNT 4

    STATEMENT OF MISCONDUCT

    Misconduct in a professional respect, contrary to rule 2(2) of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 1969 (L.1. 613) as amended.

    PARTICULARS OF MISCONDUCT

    That you, in a preliminary inquiry before the Disciplinary Committee of the General Legal Council voluntarily admitted that in responding to the complaint brought against you by your former client, Obranu Kwasi Atta VI. you forwarded a scanned copy of the said response which had information relating to your representation of the said client to a third party, via social media platform (WhatsApp), thereby failing to uphold the dignity and high standing of the legal profession.

    COUNT 5

    STATEMENT OF MISCONDUCT

    Misconduct in a professional respect, contrary to rule 9(7) of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 1969 (L.L. 613) as amended.

    PARTICULARS OF MISCONDUCT

    That you, in your dealings with your former client, Ogyeedom Obranu Kwasi Atta VI, did not behave with utmost honesty and frankness when in a conversation with the said Complainant about alleged judicial manipulation by the Chief Justice of the Republic of Ghana, facilitated the commission of the alleged bribery offence by refunding to the Complainant legal fees you were legally and duly entitled to.

    COUNT 6

    STATEMENT OF MISCONDUCT

    Misconduct in a professional respect, contrary to rule 52 (a) of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 2020 (L.I. 2423).

    PARTICULARS OF MISCONDUCT

    That you, in responding to a complaint brought against you by your former client, Ogyeedom Obranu Kwasi Atta VI, made a reckless statement suggesting judicial manipulation by the Chief Justice of the Republic of Ghana which you knew or ought to have known that it was false.

    COUNT 7

    STATEMENT OF MISCONDUCT

    Misconduct in a professional respect, contrary to rule 89 (c) of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 2020 (L.I. 2423).

    PARTICULARS OF MISCONDUCT

    That you, in responding to a complaint brought against you by your former client, Ogyeedom Obranu Kwasi Atta VI made a reckless statement imputing judicial manipulation by the Chief Justice of the Republic of Ghana, thereby engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.

    COUNT 8

    STATEMENT OF MISCONDUCT

    Misconduct in a professional respect, contrary to rule 61 (b) (ii) of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 2020 (L.1. 2423).

    PARTICULARS OF MISCONDUCT

    That you, in your response to a complaint brought against you by your former client, Ogyeedom Obranu Kwasi Atta VI, made a reckless statement imputing judicial manipulation by the Chief Justice of the Republic of Ghana, thereby diminishing public confidence in the administration of Justice.

    COUNT 9

    STATEMENT OF MISCONDUCT

    Misconduct in a professional respect, contrary to rule 21 (3) (b) of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 2020 (LI. 2423).

    PARTICULARS OF MISCONDUCT

    That you, in a preliminary inquiry before the Disciplinary Committee of the General Legal Council voluntarily admitted that in responding to the complaint brought against you by your former client, Ogyeedom Obranu Kwasi Atta VI. you forwarded a scanned copy of the said response which had information relating to your representation of the said client to a third party, via social media platform (WhatsApp), thereby making the information relating to your representation of your former client public.

    Read the full statement filed by Kwasi Afrifa at the High Court below;