The Winneba High Court on Monday threw out an application seeking to injunct and quash the decision of the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Education (UEW), Winneba from nominating three people for the Pro-Chancellor position of the university.
The applicant, Dr Kaakyire Frimpong Duku, who is also the President of the UEW’s University Teachers Association of Ghana, went to court to challenge the powers of the VC from appointing three persons to go into the contest of the Pro-Vice-Chancellor position.
READ ON:READ: Okyenhene’s position on Dec 17 referendum
The election that was scheduled for June 13, 2019 had to be postponed due to the application before the court.
JoyNews correspondent, Richard Kwadwo Nyarko reported that the applicant’s position was that, the decision of the Management of the University, permitting the Vice-Chancellor to nominate candidates for Pro-Vice-Chancellor’s election, was against the UEW statutes.
The same, he argued, was not categorically stated in the statutes, therefore, he sought a certiorari to quash the administrative decision and injunction to stop the practice.
Counsel for the respondents, Paa Kwesi Abaidoo, argued that what the applicant complained of was a custom in the University right from its inception which had crystallised into usage, practice and a convention.
“Although it is not categorically stated in the statutes of the university, it has the force of law because it has become a convention.
“The position of the Applicant that nomination of persons to Pro-Vice-Chancellor is not limited to only Professors is flawed because the same UEW statues mentioned that in the absence of the Vice-Chancellor it is the Pro-Vice-Chancellor who acts,” he stated.
“The law states that only a Professor qualifies for the position of a Pro-Vice-Chancellor and thus if the Pro-Vice-Chancellor is not a Professor, how can he step into the shoes of the office of the Vice-Chancellor?” he argued further.
Delivering her ruling before a packed court at the Winneba High Court on Monday, November 18, Justice Janapare Bartels explained the university is not an adjudicating body or a quasi-judicial body to be governed by the prerogative writs: “Article 12 of the 1992 constitution is clear in its tenets of pitching the prerogative writ only against judicial or quasi-judicial bodies. It must also be noted that order 55 of CI 47 only states the procedure by which one can come to court.”