[ad_1]
This is the second time that the suit has suffered an adjournment.
The adjournment was to enable applicant and his lawyer Justice Srem Sai to put their house in order.
Mr Justice Stephen Oppong drew the applicant’s lawyer’s attention to the fact that on the substantive matter, he noticed that what was attached to interlocutory injunction was rather an affidavit in support of the originating summons, instead of affidavit in support of the motion for the interlocutory injunction.
According to the applicant’s lawyer, that was an oversight which needed to be sorted, hence the adjournment.
Earlier on the Justice Oppong also informed the applicant and his lawyer that before he became a judge, he had worked with Minkah-Premo and Co which represented one of the defendants (that is the National Communication Authority) in the matter.
According to the court, it wanted to ascertain from the applicant if he had an objection to him hearing the matter.
Justice Sai said they would not object to the judge sitting over the matter because the trial judge was a man of integrity and he would do justice to the matter.
He said the issue before the court was of public interest and the trial judge has nothing to gain personally.
Mr Francis Kwarteng Arthur is challenging the law the emergency Communication Instrument, 2020, which violates mobile users’ rights to privacy.
The emergency legislation seeks to give legal backing to number of measures adopted by government to handle the COVID-19 pandemic.
It directs mobile network operators to provide data on all call numbers, mobile merchant codes and uncashed subscriber mobile money transfer data.
