A suit challenging the Executive Instrument (EI 63) which enables government to obtain the personal information of mobile subscribers for purposes of contact tracing in the Covid-19 pandemic fight in Ghana has been adjourned for a second time.
This was after the court, presided over by Justice Stephen Oppong, noticed that lawyers for the applicant had inadvertently attached the ‘wrong’ supporting affidavit to their motion for interlocutory injunction.
A private legal practitioner, Francis Kwarteng Arthur, sued government seeking to stop the President, Kelni GVG and the National Communication Authority (NCA) from securing his personal mobile information from Vodafone and MTN Ghana for contact tracing.
He contends that access to such information which is in the possession of the telecoms companies will amount to a breach of his fundamental human right to privacy.
He subsequently filed a motion for interlocutory injunction seeking to stop the government and the other respondents in the matter from having access to such information until the final determination of the case which was supposed to be moved yesterday.
But when the case was called, Justice Oppong noticed an error in the processes filed by lawyers for the applicants who attached the affidavit in support of the main suit to the motion for interlocutory injunction instead of an affidavit in support of the motion.
The Counsel for the applicant, Justice Sai, said it was an oversight, and the court directed him to do the right thing and serve the other parties in the case.
Possible Bias
Meanwhile, lawyers for the applicant have waived their right to object to Justice Stephen Oppong hearing the matter on the grounds of possible bias.
The judge had drawn the attention of the lawyers that he had previously worked with the Kumasi office of Minkah-Premo & Co law firm which is representing NCA in the instant case before becoming a judge.
But the applicant’s counsel said they had followed the professional career of the judge and said he had exhibited integrity, and they are convinced that he will handle the case professionally, especially when the case is of public interest.
The case was then adjourned to May 20, 2020 for the motion for interlocutory injunction to be moved.
Main Suit
Francis Arthur’s argument is that although the President has the power to procure his personal information under the appropriate circumstances taking into account the appropriate factors, the manner in which the government is seeking to procure the information at this particular time breaches the law and violates his right to administrative justice, to privacy and equality.
He is seeking, among other things, an order of the High Court “to quash the President’s directives in EI 63 to the extent that they have violated, are violating or are likely to violate his fundamental human rights and freedoms.”
He is also seeking “a perpetual injunction to restrain Vodafone Ghana and MTN Ghana from relying on EI 63 to make his personal information in their possession available to the President, the Government, Kelni GVG and the National Communication Authority.”
BY Gibril Abdul Razak