UG lied about winning court case – Lawyer

A private Lawyer, Egbert Faibille Junior has described as “deceptive” and “disgraceful” what he said was the University of Ghana’s clear and deliberate misinterpretation of a court ruling concerning a haggle over using the school’s roads as thoroughfare.

The University on Wednesday issued a statement on its official website informing the public that a Human Right Court in Accra has dismissed a case brought against the institution by some 130 parents of pupils at the University of Ghana Basic School (UNIPRA).

The parents had sued the University for closing all access routes into its campus to the public, with the exception of the entrance from the Okponglo intersection.

The University put together a defense, which argued that the road restrictions were necessary if they were to create a conducive academic community for their students.

The university stated that about 16,000 vehicles travel through its Legon campus every day, a situation the authorities say poses nuisance to academic work and also threatens security.

Angered by the university’s decision, the UNIPRA parents who now find it difficult to comfortably transport their children in and out of school due to the blockage, filed the suit seeking a perpetual injunction against the university from continuing with the ongoing restrictions.

Speaking on STARR TODAY on Starr 103.5FM Faibille said the university did not win the case as being portrayed by its authorities. According to him, a tiny technical detail has forced the court to dismiss the case, which can be revived.

“When the application was called, the University argued that the capacity in which the case was brought was not proper based on the age of the children. It was a matter of technicality. The parents should have sued as friends of those children. So that was the basis on which the court called off the case asking them to file the case properly. That was all!” he told STARR TODAY. In her defense, public relations officer of the University, Stella Amoah, said they only relayed the information sent to them by the court and are unaware of the technicalities.

“We have put out the information based on what the court decided. We do not have an opinion on what was said. All we published was that the court dismissed the application brought by the parents and that is what the court sent us.”

According to her, the university is not misinforming the public in anyway.

Egbert Faibille, however, advised the parents to correct the lapses in their case and re-file for hearing.

“They sued in a defective capacity so they can go back to court to correct that defect,” he said.