GFA dares crime office, Friday, December 10, 2010, Front page
THE Ghana Football Association (GFA) has taken its case against the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) to court to revive an earlier claim that the anti-graft unit has no business in football affairs.
Following last Tuesday’s raid of the GFA’s premises by the EOCO, the GFA filed a writ at the High Court in Accra yesterday challenging the action of the anti-corruption body which culminated in the seizure of computers and files from the offices of the FA in Accra.
The writ, which was filed at the High Court by Dery and Co, solicitors of the GFA, seeks, among other reliefs, an order of injunction restraining the EOCO from carrying out investigations into the operations of the FA.
The injunction against the EOCO’s investigation also relates to documents on any private individual, person or entity as a partner of the GFA, including the Ghana League Clubs Association (GHALCA) and Midsea Limited.
On September 9, 2010, a member of the GFA Executive Committee, Mr George Afriyie, initiated a similar legal action at the High Court seeking to restrain the EOCO from carrying out investigations into the affairs of the GFA.
The latest writ by the GFA prayed the court to declare that the request made by the EOCO concerning the documents in question was ultra vires and illegal and an unjustifiable interference with the GFA’s right to privacy.
The GFA is further seeking an order for the EOCO to pay it “punitive damages for the unjustifiable, needless and avoidable violation of the GFA’s right to privacy, property and work”.
Meanwhile, the EOCO has stated that it has retrieved vital information from the computers, documents and files seized from the GFA offices last Tuesday.
It, however, stated that it had no hand in the locking up of the offices of the GFA at any time before, during or after the search and seizure exercise, pointing out that the place was locked up by the GFA itself.
A statement signed by the Executive Director of the EOCO, Mr Mortey Akpadzi, said subsequent to the search and seizure, the office had successfully taken operational measures to procure the documents and information it required from the computers, documents and files of the GFA.
He assured Ghanaians that very detailed investigations would be undertaken and if any person was found to have broken the laws of Ghana, appropriate action would be taken against that person.
“Our legal mandate which obliges us to carry out these investigations cannot be different from what happens in other jurisdictions, even in FIFA’s own home country, which saw similar investigations and subsequent search of the FIFA President’s office by the Swiss police in November 2005,” it said.
Explaining why the EOCO acted in the manner it did, the statement said on September 7, 2010, the office, acting on information it received through its monitoring activities and in accordance with the law, requested the GFA to provide certain documents and information related to the EOCO’s investigations into certain financial affairs of the GFA which the office had cause to believe had breaches of the country’s laws on tax, fraud and others.
It said the request was sent to the Ministry of Youth and Sports, the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, the National Sports Council, the Controller and Accountant General’s Department, GHALCA, the Professional League Board, the GFA (per its president) and the Office of the President.
It said on September 9, 2010, Mr George Afriyie, an executive member of the GFA, initiated action at the High Court seeking to restrain the EOCO from undertaking any investigations into the affairs of the GFA.
It said the EOCO, in reaction to the legal action, filed an affidavit in opposition to the application on September 24, 2010.
“In the meantime, all the other institutions to whom requests had been sent had dully complied and forwarded the requested documents and information to the office,” it added.
Commenting further on Mr Afriyie’s law suit, the statement said the EOCO received a certificate of non-compliance from the High Court indicating that Mr Afriyie had failed to comply with the conditions required by the court for his case to be heard.
It noted that the Court Registrar, in the face of the status of Mr Afriyie’s application, accordingly, invited the parties to court on October 25, 2010 but Mr Afriyie’s lawyers went to court to withdraw his application on that day.
It said on October 11, 2010, the office sent a reminder to the GFA concerning its earlier request and received a letter from the GFA on October 14, 2010 with a terse message that “the GFA would get back to you on the subject as soon as possible as the notice is very short”.
Following last Tuesday’s raid of the GFA’s premises by the EOCO, the GFA filed a writ at the High Court in Accra yesterday challenging the action of the anti-corruption body which culminated in the seizure of computers and files from the offices of the FA in Accra.
The writ, which was filed at the High Court by Dery and Co, solicitors of the GFA, seeks, among other reliefs, an order of injunction restraining the EOCO from carrying out investigations into the operations of the FA.
The injunction against the EOCO’s investigation also relates to documents on any private individual, person or entity as a partner of the GFA, including the Ghana League Clubs Association (GHALCA) and Midsea Limited.
On September 9, 2010, a member of the GFA Executive Committee, Mr George Afriyie, initiated a similar legal action at the High Court seeking to restrain the EOCO from carrying out investigations into the affairs of the GFA.
The latest writ by the GFA prayed the court to declare that the request made by the EOCO concerning the documents in question was ultra vires and illegal and an unjustifiable interference with the GFA’s right to privacy.
The GFA is further seeking an order for the EOCO to pay it “punitive damages for the unjustifiable, needless and avoidable violation of the GFA’s right to privacy, property and work”.
Meanwhile, the EOCO has stated that it has retrieved vital information from the computers, documents and files seized from the GFA offices last Tuesday.
It, however, stated that it had no hand in the locking up of the offices of the GFA at any time before, during or after the search and seizure exercise, pointing out that the place was locked up by the GFA itself.
A statement signed by the Executive Director of the EOCO, Mr Mortey Akpadzi, said subsequent to the search and seizure, the office had successfully taken operational measures to procure the documents and information it required from the computers, documents and files of the GFA.
He assured Ghanaians that very detailed investigations would be undertaken and if any person was found to have broken the laws of Ghana, appropriate action would be taken against that person.
“Our legal mandate which obliges us to carry out these investigations cannot be different from what happens in other jurisdictions, even in FIFA’s own home country, which saw similar investigations and subsequent search of the FIFA President’s office by the Swiss police in November 2005,” it said.
Explaining why the EOCO acted in the manner it did, the statement said on September 7, 2010, the office, acting on information it received through its monitoring activities and in accordance with the law, requested the GFA to provide certain documents and information related to the EOCO’s investigations into certain financial affairs of the GFA which the office had cause to believe had breaches of the country’s laws on tax, fraud and others.
It said the request was sent to the Ministry of Youth and Sports, the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, the National Sports Council, the Controller and Accountant General’s Department, GHALCA, the Professional League Board, the GFA (per its president) and the Office of the President.
It said on September 9, 2010, Mr George Afriyie, an executive member of the GFA, initiated action at the High Court seeking to restrain the EOCO from undertaking any investigations into the affairs of the GFA.
It said the EOCO, in reaction to the legal action, filed an affidavit in opposition to the application on September 24, 2010.
“In the meantime, all the other institutions to whom requests had been sent had dully complied and forwarded the requested documents and information to the office,” it added.
Commenting further on Mr Afriyie’s law suit, the statement said the EOCO received a certificate of non-compliance from the High Court indicating that Mr Afriyie had failed to comply with the conditions required by the court for his case to be heard.
It noted that the Court Registrar, in the face of the status of Mr Afriyie’s application, accordingly, invited the parties to court on October 25, 2010 but Mr Afriyie’s lawyers went to court to withdraw his application on that day.
It said on October 11, 2010, the office sent a reminder to the GFA concerning its earlier request and received a letter from the GFA on October 14, 2010 with a terse message that “the GFA would get back to you on the subject as soon as possible as the notice is very short”.
It said following this letter, the EOCO “waited until it was determined that the GFA was not taking any steps to supply the documents and information requested for, when an application was made to the High Court for the order and search warrant which was executed on Tuesday, December 7, 2010”.
It said the EOCO, between 4:30 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. on December 8, 2010, sent back all the seized equipment and files but when its officials got to the GFA premises, they had been locked up.
The statement said even though the EOCO contacted the GFA General Secretary, Mr Kofi Nsiah, by a text message that the EOCO was there to return the seized items, Mr Nsiah replied with a text saying the executive committee of the FA had closed down the GFA offices until further notice.
Comments
Post a Comment