The Supreme Court has for the second time adjourned their judgment over the legality of government’s decision to accept the continuous stay of two Gitmo detainees in the country.
According to the court, the interpretation of article 75 and 83 of the constitution with regards to the substantive case, was monumental, and therefore more time was needed to give consideration to it.
The court has since set the 22nd of June 2017 for the judgment.
It further ordered the two parties in the case to file submissions on whether the country could abrogate an international agreement if it goes contrary to the laws.
Two Ghanaian citizens, Margaret Bamful and Henry Nana Boakye, sued the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, together with the Minister of Interior, accusing then President John Mahama of illegally bringing in the two former Gitmo detainees, without recourse to the laws of the land.
The plaintiffs are seeking among other reliefs a “declaration that on a true and proper interpretation of Article 75 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the President of the Republic of Ghana acted unconstitutionally by agreeing to the transfer of Mahmud Umar Muhammad Bin Atef and Khalid Muhammad Salih Al-Dhuby.”
Ex-Guantanamo detainees pose no security threat – US Embassy
Ghanaians met government’s decision to host the two as a threat to national security, but Government insisted the two men posed no threat.
In January 2016, the United States Embassy in Ghana, assured Ghanaians that the presence of the two former detainees, posed no threat to the security of the country.
“The two detainees that were transferred to Ghana have already arrived…we don’t have access to the specifics of their whereabouts, you have to go to the government of Ghana for that,” Public Affairs Counselor at the US Embassy in Ghana, Daniel Fennell said.
The two Guantanamo bay detainees, Mahmud Umar Muhammad Bin Atef and Khalid Muhammad Salih Al-Dhuby, had been in detention for 14 years, after being linked with terrorist group Al-Qaeda.
Meanwhile, Nana Agyei Baffour, has told journalists that they will follow the court’s order to file submissions on whether or not the country could abrogate an international agreement because it infringes on its domestic laws.