General News of Thursday, 13 July 2017
At least one of the petitioners who attempted to stop the law school entrance exams but failed says he is not psychologically prepared to write the exams tomorrow.
Ken Donkor said he is highly “traumatized” by the High Court’s decision to dismiss their application.
He was one of 11 students who attempted stop the July 14 entrance exams being organized by the Ghana School of Law.
They were seeking to enforce a recent ruling by the Supreme Court which declared as unconstitutional the policy of entrance exams at the School.
Even though the judges at the Apex Court found the practice illegal, they further ruled that the impending exams scheduled on Friday July 14 should take place as scheduled.
But the petitioner Professor Stephen Kweku Asare, popularly called Kweku Azar had mixed feelings about the ruling.
Even though he was excited about the decision to outlaw the entrance exams, he did not understand why the court would allow the school to go ahead with an exam they have described as unconstitutional.
With few days away to the exams, a number of students itching to enter into the law school but unhappy with the entrance exams decided to file an injunction application in court.
Their lawyer, Ansah Asare, who was himself a former Director of the Ghana School of Law argued in court that to allow the exam to take place “will amount to the court granting immunity to a body that has acted with impunity.”
But the GLC opposed the application, Joy News’ Joseph Ackah Blay reported. Nana Yaw Ntrakwa, who represented the GLC argued the High Court was the wrong forum to go to if the students disagreed with the decision of the Supreme Court.
Delivering his ruling on the application for injunction, Justice Anthony Yeboah said the orders of the Supreme Court were given in a certain context. He did not think they were a blanket declaration of unconstitutionality as the applicants argued.
Grounding his argument, the judge quoted the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Prof. Kwaku Asare case; “As preparations towards admissions in October 2017 have already been initiated and bearing in mind that persons who would avail themselves of such opportunities are qualified within the scope of regulations 2 and 3 as pronounced in this judgment, we do not think it is in the public interest to interfere with such arrangement.”
Justice Yeboah said, “It would appear from a thorough and careful reading of the judgment of their Lordships that the declaration of unconstitutionality was made subject to the above-quoted limitation”.
“It cannot, therefore, be a correct rendition of the judgment, as the plaintiffs contend, that their Lordships declared the entrance examination illegal and unconstitutional unconditionally. The rights of the plaintiffs and persons like them are subject to the above limitation for the time being.”
Reacting to the ruling, Ken Donkor, said he is “not composed to write the exam.” He found the ruling strange despite the pre-trial orientation given to him and his colleague petitioners by their lawyer.
“Our lawyer told us it is going to be 50-50,” he said but still found the final ruling troubling.