GJA President, others slapped with law suit


‘President’ of the Ghana Journalists Association (GJA), Affail Monney, has been slapped with a law suit at an Accra High Court by one Caroline Boateng, a member of the Association.

Joined in the suit are the National Council of the GJA and the Election Committee as 2nd and 3rd Respondents respectively.

According to the Plaintiff, Caroline Boateng, the mandate of Mr. Monney and the GJA National Council expired on the 17th November 2020 and therefore their continued stay in office is illegal.

The Plaintiff argued that the respondents purporting to conduct elections are not legitimate and that they should have set up an interim body to manage the affairs of the GJA from 17th November, 2020 when their tenure expired but failed to do so for their personal benefit.

In a statement of claim and supported by an Affidavit, the Plaintiff argued that the 1st Respondent, Mr. Affail Monney is the immediate past president whose tenure of office terminated on the 17th of November 2020.

The 2nd Respondent is made of the national executives and the Regional Chairmen of the GJA whose tenure of office also terminated on 17th of November 2020 while the 3rd Respondent is a committee set up by the 1st and 2nd Respondents.

The Plaintiff indicated the 1st and 2nd Respondents set up the 3rd Respondent to conduct elections before the expiration of their term of office in 2020.

According to the Plaintiff, the 1st and 2nd Respondents failed in their duties to ensure that the 3rd Respondent carried out its mandate because the they wanted to illegally extend their mandate and influence the subsequent elections.

“Though the terms of office for the defendants expired on the 17th day of November, 2020, the 3rd defendants is holding itself as a committee mandated to conduct elections”

“The 3rd defendants mandate ended on 17th November, 2020 and therefore cannot purport to be holding elections in 2021.”

The Plaintiff noted that the actions taken so far by the 3rd Respondent in the name of GJA is therefore against the very constitution that set all the defendants up.




Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here