ERNEST FRIMPONG-NUAMAH AND CUSTOMS, EXCISE & PREVENTIVE SERVICE (CEPS) [2001]DLCHRAJ6047

Date	2001-03-09
Suit No.	Our Ref: CHRAJ/424/27/98/948
Citation No.	[2001]DLCHRAJ6047

B. K. OPPONG

[2001]DLCHRAJ6047
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;color:#00B050">ERNEST FRIMPONG-NUAMAH <o:p></o:p>(COMPLAINANT)<o:p></o:p>AND<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;color:#00B050">CUSTOMS, EXCISE &amp;
PREVENTIVE SERVICE (CEPS) <o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">(CHRAJ)<o:p></o:p>

Our Ref: CHRAJ/424/27/98/948&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; DATE: 09/03/2001<o:p></o:p>

</div>commissioner:<o:p></o:p>B.
K. OPPONG DEPUTY COMMISSIONER LEGAL &amp; OPERATIONS FOR COMMISSIONER<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;mso-pagination:none;
border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;
mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">DECISION<o:p></o:p>

</div>The Complainant, Mr. Ernest
Frimpong-Nuamah until the termination of his appointment, was the Chief
Collector in charge of Investigations of the Respondents. In his petition dated
20" July, 1998 he sought the intervention of the Commission to reverse the
termination of his appointment by the Respondents. .<o:p></o:p>The
facts of the case are undisputed. On 14th July, 1997, a lead story in the Daily
Graphic under the caption: "SHAKE-UP AT CEPS" reported the
termination of the appointments of the Complainant and several others.
Subsequently, the Respondents by their letter No. H/STAFF/2/1 dated 15th July,
1997 officially notified the Complainant of the termination of his appointment
by payment of three months salary in lieu of notice. No reasons were stated in
the said letter for the termination.<o:p></o:p>Following representations made to the
Office of the President and the Governing Board of the Respondents the Office
of the President requested the Governing Board to convene in order to
reconsider the case of the complainant. The Governing Board requested its
sub-Committee on Legal Matters to examine the Complainant's case and make
recommendations to the Board. After its deliberations during which the
Complainant was made to appear to state his defence, the Sub-Committee
dismissed his petition for re-instatement and accordingly recommended to the
Board the endorsement of its earlier decision to terminate the complainant's
appointment.<o:p></o:p>In
his petition before the Commission, the Complainant pleaded among other things
that he was not accorded the right to state his defence prior to the
termination of his appointment.<o:p></o:p>In
their response to the petition dated 31st August, 1999, the Respondents argued
that the Complainant's appointment was terminated by the Government on the
recommendations of the Board of Directors. They stated also that the
complainant had been found by the Sub-Committee to have a problem with his
professional conduct and that he had on more than one occasion been cautioned
by the late Commissioner, Mr. Ewun-Tohma. The Respondents further argued that
an examination of Mr. Nuamah's personal file revealed that he was on record as
having assaulted the wife of a fellow officer at the CEPS barracks where they
lived, adding that he had on occasion been found to be of drunken behaviour.<o:p></o:p>In
his rebuttal to the Respondents' comments dated 6th September, 1999 the
Complainant admitted receiving the amount of ¢15,400,000 but argued that the said
amount represented his accumulated leave allowance which he was in any case
entitled to. He further explained that his failure to mention the payment of
the said amount in his petition to the Board was for the simple reason that at
the time he wrote the petition, i.e. 15th July, 1997, he had not as yet
received the money.<o:p></o:p>The
Complainant further denied the Respondents' argument that he had a problem with
his professional conduct, arguing that on no occasion during his eleven years'
service was he given a written query or even a caution.<o:p></o:p>A formal hearing was conducted into the
petition to determine its merits. The issues for resolution before the
Commission were:<o:p></main>