Court to decide on lotto operators' suit August 20

Friday, August 15, 2008 (Page 31)

THE Accra Fast Track High Court will on Wednesday, August 20, 2008 decide whether or not to dismiss an action instituted against the National Lottery Authority (NLA) by the Ghana Lotto Operators Association (GLOA) on the constitutionality or otherwise of the National Lottery Authority (NLA) Act 2006, Act 722.
The court fixed the date after counsel for the NLA, Mr Kizito Beyuo and counsel for the GLOA, Mr Aurelius Awuku, had argued on the matter at the court’s sitting in Accra yesterday.
Mr Beyuo prayed the court to dismiss GLOA’s suit against the NLA on the grounds that the Supreme Court had declared as constitutional the Lotto Act and for that reason there was no basis for the suit to continue at the lower court.
According to him, the entire basis of the claim by GLOA and six other plaintiffs was that the Lotto Act was unconstitutional and infringed on their rights.
He said since the Supreme Court in a unanimous decision on July 23, 2008 declared the Lotto Act as constitutional and did not infringe on the plaintiff’s rights, the plaintiffs action was bereft of any cause of action.
Mr Beyuo accordingly prayed the court to dismiss the plaintiffs’ action and award costs.
Replying, Mr Awuku said the matter could not be heard summarily because it involved the GLOA and six others, namely Obiri Asare and Sons Limited, Rambel Enterprise Limited, Dan Multi-Purpose Trading Enterprise Limited, Agrop Association Limited, Star Lotto Limited and From-Home Enterprises.
He said taking away the businesses of the plaintiffs developed over the years without the payment of the requisite compensation was not right.
According to Mr Awuku, the matter did not border on only the constitutionality or otherwise of the Lotto Act, but involved the unreasonable directive from the NLA, which had virtually outlawed the operations of the GLOA.
Counsel informed the court that the argument raised by the NLA exposed the NLA’s confusion on the matter and for that reason, it was important for the case to be heard on its merit.
Mr Awuku prayed the court not to entertain the NLA’s application on the grounds that the NLA was virtually asking the court to accede to “kangaroo” style of adjudication of cases.
He said the Supreme Court recognised that there were cogent matters that required investigation and determination by the High Court and so did not make a consequential order terminating the plaintiffs’ case.
According to counsel, the plaintiffs’ case was “too weighty’ to be determined summarily.
He accordingly prayed the court to dismiss the NLA’s application on the grounds that it was without merit.
The Supreme Court on July 23, 2008 stated that the National Lottery Authority (NLA) Act 2006, Act 722, was not in contravention of the 1992 Constitution and that the statement of claim of the plaintiffs did not state in any way how the law infringed on their rights, especially those enshrined in Articles 33(5), 35(1) and 36 (2)(b).
Following the ruling, the parties were expected to go back to the High Court where the substantive issue was pending for directions because the Supreme Court neither gave any orders nor award costs.
As a result of the Supreme Court’s decision, the NLA filed the application at the Fast-track High Court before a vacation judge, praying the court to dismiss the plaintiffs case.
The GLOA, on August 13, 2007, began the action at the High Court and applied for an interlocutory injunction against the NLA, which was granted, until the determination of the matter.
However, since the NLA raised the issue of constitutionality, the matter went to the Supreme Court because the law required that proceedings in such issues should be stayed for determination by the superior court to serve as a guide to the trial court.
According to the plaintiffs, the NLA had taken over the assets of the Department of National Lotteries (DNL), instead of overseeing the operations of the DNL, thereby resulting in the cessation of the existence of the DNL.
The GLOA said the National Lotto Act, which outlawed the operations of lotto business by private lotto operators, infringed the constitutionally guaranteed right of private lotto operators to free economic activity.
However, the NLA insisted that the law was constitutional and, therefore, did not infringe on the rights of the GLOA.
The Accra High Court, on March 14, 2008, granted an interlocutory injunction filed by the GLOA to restrain the NLA from interfering with the property rights of lotto operating businesses of the plaintiffs.
According to the court, the outcome of the case at the Supreme Court would guide it in its decision in the case because the issue of constitutionality had been raised by the NLA.