Posted:Daily Guide |Friday, 20 August 2010
By Charles Takyi-Boadu
Chairman of the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC), Dr Kwabena Adjei has ostensibly been left alone in the wilderness to grieve over the flaks he has been receiving from all sections of the country for the unguarded comments he made about the judiciary.
He had indicated government’s preparedness to ‘clean’ or purge the judiciary for supposedly being biased against the current administration, stressing that “people in the judiciary can make a very good case look very bad.”
Furthermore, he said “if the judiciary is biased, if the judiciary has made its mind in one direction, not even Jesus Christ who was appointed as the Attorney General can change things.
We will clean it if they don’t take steps to clean it” and warned “we will clean it and let everybody everywhere blame us for interfering in the judiciary and we will take them on.”
Obviously compelled by growing public pressure to state its position on the matter, government came out with a statement on the issue yesterday, distancing itself, albeit faintly.
Though government did not directly distance itself from the party chairman’s position, it however denied having any such ill motives to purge the judiciary as Kwabena Adjei sought to say.
A statement issued by Information Minister John Akologu Tia yesterday on government’s behalf reassured the Judiciary, the general public and the international community that it “has absolutely no intention of carrying out a political purge of the judiciary.”
Though Kwabena Adjei was emphatic in his statement about the judiciary, government tried to put a spin on it since, according to Mr. Tia, “government believes that is not what Dr. Kwabena Adjei sought to imply by his remarks.”
Government says it has taken note of concerns raised in the wake of remarks made by the NDC chairman regarding the administration of justice in the country.
That notwithstanding, it said it was unfortunate that political opponents of the NDC had seized upon Dr. Kwabena Adjei’s remarks as an opportunity to demonize the government and cause undue panic and fear among the judiciary.
It was however hopeful that the Judiciary had within it, persons of integrity whose conscience, professionalism and dedication to the rule of law would lead them to correct whatever negative impression that the public had about the administration of justice in this country.