KENNETH GYAN-KESSE & 87 OTHERS AND THE NATIONAL SECURITY CO-ORDINATOR [2011]DLCHRAJ5964

Date	2011-10-13
Suit No.	CHRAJ/2009/HQ/01706/654
Citation No.	[2011]DLCHRAJ5964

JOSEPH WHITTAL

[2011]DLCHRAJ5964
																																						<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">KENNETH GYAN-KESSE &amp; 87 OTHERS<o:p></o:p>(COMPLAINANTS)<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">THE NATIONAL SECURITY CO-ORDINATOR<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(CHRAJ)<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:
none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in;
mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">CHRAJ/2009/HQ/01706/654&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 13/10/2011<o:p></o:p>

</div>INTRODUCTION<o:p></o:p>On 1st November 2009, the
Complainants who are former National Security Personnel, lodged a petition
against the National Security Coordinator alleging that their appointments as
National Security Officers was terminated without any reason and without any gratuity
for the services rendered to the nation.<o:p></o:p>The complaint was originally lodged by seven (7) affected persons
for themselves and 196 other persons. The number was reduced to 88 after
scrutiny and discussions with the leaders of the Complainants.<o:p></o:p>COMPLAINANTS'
CASE<o:p></o:p>The Complainants alleged that
they were employed as National Security Personnel and posted to their duty
stations in Accra, Kumasi, Takoradi, Tema and other parts of the country. That
to their dismay and shock, they received their termination of appointment
letters from the National Security Headquarters, Castle Annex, signed by the
Deputy National Security Co-ordinator in-charge of Services.<o:p></o:p>According to the Complainants,
prior to the termination of their appointments, they had met with the new
National Security Co-ordinator who had assumed office following the change in
the political administration of the country after the December 2008 elections
who had assured them that no worker would be sacked, but that if need be, there
would be some postings. According to them, they are permanent workers who owe
allegiance to the State and not any political party.<o:p></o:p>The Complainants say that they were recruited after a thorough
security checks on them from their various backgrounds and were confirmed after
serving their one year probation period. Their appointments were governed by
the 1992 Constitution and the Security and Intelligence Act, 1996 which
guaranteed the protection and permanency of their jobs according to them.<o:p></o:p>What makes them think that the termination of their appointments
was fishy was the fact that the termination of appointment letters was copied
only to the Castle Annex without the Auditor General, the Controller and
Accountant General and the Public Services Secretariat being copied.<o:p></o:p>They pray the intervention of the Commission to have their
gratuity paid for the services rendered to the nation. Their colleagues are
still in active service not because they have better qualification than them,
they claimed.<o:p></o:p>THE
COMMISSION'S INVESTIGATIONS<o:p></o:p>The Commission commenced investigations into the complaint and in
the course of its investigations caused the complaint to be forwarded to the
Respondent requesting for comments. This, the Respondent failed to do within
the stipulated 14 day period that the Commission gave it.<o:p></o:p>The Commission in another letter dated 2nd June 2010, reminded the
Respondent of the request for comments. This time, the Respondent swiftly
submitted its response which was a very brief response.<o:p></o:p>RESPONDENT'S
CASE<o:p></o:p>The Respondent denied that it wrongfully or unjustifiably
terminated the appointment of the Complainants. He explained that upon the
termination of the appointments of the Complainants they were offered 3 month</main>