THE LAW AND YOU - THE HOLIDAY ACT 2001, ACT 601 AS AMENDED BY ACT 626

QUESTION 

Mr Desmond, please I'm Aidoo and a student of UDS and my dad operates a garage for sale of cars, a pub  and a supermarket.

We always open for work even on Sundays but as we tried to go for work today, dad called us not to open the garage shop because he is a legible candidate for the KMA's Chief Executive position but refused to tell us how that could affect him.

Please, could that be a legal issue???

ANSWER 

Mr Aidoo, if you could listen to the radio yesterday, today is a holiday via an executive instrument because of the Eid-Fitr celebration of Muslims on Saturday. 

A public holiday is a holiday generally established by law. 

Holidays can land on a specific day of the year, be tied to a certain day of the week in a certain month or follow other calendar systems.

Public holidays in Ghana are governed by the Holidays Act, 2001, Act 601 as amended by Act 626. The law specifies quite a number of holidays and the President through the interior Minister, may in the public interest, by Executive Instrument declare any other day to be a public holiday just like today. 

The law governing public holidays is that all offices, businesses, trading and work related concerns are required to close down and observe the day.

The law only provides exceptions for certain category of businesses to open on public holidays.
These are businesses or shops dealing with food or grocery, drugs or pharmacy, licensed restaurants or hotels, local markets for sale of food or foodstuffs, premises licensed for sale of spirit, wine, and beer under the Liquor Licensing Act, 1970 (Act 331), the running of an essential public service specified such as water supply services, electricity supply services, health and hospital services, sanitary services, air traffic and civil aviation control services, meteorological services, fire services, air transport services, supply and distribution of fuel, petrol, power and light, telecommunications services and public transport services.

The punishment for an individual opening a shop or businesses which do not fall under the exceptions on a public holiday is summary conviction to a fine not exceeding 100 penalty units (NB:each penalty unit currently is equivalent to GHC12) or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding three months or both.

Where the offence is committed by a body of persons such as a limited liability company, every director or officer of that company shall be deemed to have committed that offence and in the case of a partnership or firm, every partner of the partnership or firm shall be deemed to have committed that offence.
In the case of your father, shops licenced under the Liquor Licensing Act for selling alcoholic beverages fall under the exception in the law.

This implies that if your father’s pub is licensed under the law he should have no problem in opening it today, which is a public holiday.

In the case of the supermarket, much will depend on the items sold. If it is mostly drinks and food items, it will fall under shops dealing with food or grocery in which case no offence would have been committed by your father for opening on a public holiday.

However, if the items sold in the supermarket are non-food items, your father would have fallen foul of the law.
However, opening the garage for sales of cars conflicts with the dictates of the law and perhaps an aspirant of his calibre shouldn't fall foul to it since it is a business which is not exempted from the category of shops that can open on public holidays. Your father would then have committed an offence by opening that office on a public Holiday like today. 

In fact, your dad could be arrested and prosecuted  immediately, since no discretion was given in the law to first warn people before prosecution. 

You may therefore advise your dad to open the pub and supermarket for business if they are licensed but not the garage.

Ampadu Desmond 

Raf.solicitors&legal consult 

“How should the dispute over ‘religious prayer’ in public basic schools be resolved in a manner appropriate to Ghana’s constitutional democracy?”

“I have a good idea, for if you meet a person from different religion and he want to make argument about God. My idea is you listen to everything this man say about God. Never argue about God with him. Best thing to say is, I agree with you, then you go home, pray what you want. This is my idea for people to have peace about religion”. – Elizabeth Gilbert.

President John Mahama’s assertion on religious violations and subsequent directive to heads of public institutions threatening sanctions at the 2015 state of the nation address evidently ignited public debate on the subject of religious tolerance and the need for the Ghanaian society to take a second look at it.

Article 14(1) of the constitution 1992 dictate that every person shall be entitled to his personal liberty and no person shall be deprived of it.

Article 21 (1)(c) also guarantees the right of each citizen to religious freedom and to manifest it at will.

Article 25 (1) states that “All persons shall have the right to equal educational opportunities and facilities and with a view to achieving the full realization of that right ".

Core to human liberty, development and advancement is the pursuit of happiness which has embedded in it the right of each individual to tolerate the religious freedoms and rights of the other.

Article 14(1) of the constitution 1992 states "Every person shall be entitled to his personal liberty and no person shall be deprived of his personal liberty except in the following cases and in accordance with procedure permitted by law.

(e) for the purpose of the education or welfare of a person who has not attained the age of eighteen years; ”

It is clear from the above constitutional provision that the rights of each citizen is unconditionally guaranteed and at the same time could be legitimately curtailed article 14(1)(e) stated above (Emphasis mine). This is important because although each citizen is entitled to their personal liberties, allowances exist to curtail such rights.

Religious practice comes with its positive and negative effects to society. Napoleon Bonapart puts it that “religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet. Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich”. The moral advocacy role advanced by religion emphasises its essence to societal stability. Jesus Christ, leader and founder of the Christian religion for instance in an answer to a question posed by one of his disciples Peter on the Godly standard to forgiveness mentioned forgiveness up to seventy seven times seven (Matthew 18:21-22). The Qu’ran in (Surat Ash-Shura, 40) admonishes Muslims that “the repayment of a bad action is one equivalent to it. But if someone pardons and puts things right, his reward is with Allah. Certainly He does not love wrongdoers. Forgiveness as a virtue yields tolerance in society.  Impliedly, a society indoctrinated with the above scriptures ultimately experiences tolerance among its citizenry. With a forgiving citizenry, tolerance is promoted and societal stability is guaranteed.

Contrary, many aggrieved persons take advantage of religious ideals to promote evil in society. Boko Haram of Nigeria and the Al-Shebab of Somalia by their villain acts and mass murder are clear examples of abuses associated with unregulated religious freedom.

Religious practices also serve a platform of socialization. Many unmarried persons have found their life partners at religious functions as well as establishing a plethora of contacts.

The acts of rouge religious leaders who take advantage of their followers and extort monies from them can not be overlooked. The recent report of a televangelist African American pastor (Rev. Creflo Dollar) admonishing his congregation to contribute $300 each to enable him purchase for use a private airplane typifies the extortive schemes of some pastors visited on their unsuspecting followers.

Religion above all promotes a balance in society by catering for the needs of needy persons in society. Islam for instance obliges its followers as part of observing the five pillars of Islam to perform “Zakat” – alms giving. Furthermore, followers of Islam are enjoined to perform this practice after the id-il-fitr fasting. Similarly, the Judeo Christian edict contained in Numbers 18:26 injuncts followers of the Christian religion to willingly give to the needy in society. Such is further enforced by apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 9:7 that God loves not just any type of giver, but a cheerful one.

Having briefly examined the constitutional basis for which religious freedom is grounded as well as its general pros and cons associated to religion, it thus becomes incumbent of religious leaders to impact on its followers the tenets of their respective religion particularly at their formative ages.

I trust that the framers of the constitution 1992 prior to capturing article 21(c) were very much aware and as well anticipated instances where veritable religious schools in Ghana would admit persons who do not share in their beliefs. The Daily Graphic on the 13^th April 2015 reported on its website that many of the catholic stronghold institutions in Ghana including Bishop Herman College in Kpando, Holy Child School in Cape Coast and many more schools peacefully dwell together with Muslim students to the extent that Islamic places of worship is created for them to observe their religious practices. In Ola Girls SHS for instance, as recently reported by the Daily Graphic, it came to light after a splendid performance by its school choir that about half of the members were Muslims.  That is the extent to which religion is tolerated and harmonized at hardcore Senior High Schools (SHS).

The advocacy for religious seclusion at public institutions is made against the backdrop that many of their followers in the long run abandon their religion for an alien one. Sadly, such advocacy is made without consideration to the social harmonic effects that associate the practice.

Notwithstanding that a person could proceed to invoke article 33 of the constitution 1992 for the High Court’s intervention of Human Rights violations, yet still article 2(1) for a nullity declaration and subsequent enforcement of article 21(c) of the constitution 1992 by the Supreme Court. I believe the words of the legend scientist and philosopher Albert Einstein becomes relevant here; that is “laws alone cannot secure freedom of expression; in order that every man presents his views without penalty, there must be a spirit of tolerance in the entire population”.

Strict enforcement of laws at the expense of consensus building will not survive the test of time as the problem may be artificially suppressed or buried only to surface after a period of time in an ugly manner.  It thus is not prudent that the law is strictly enforced against societal support. Consensus building is crucial to societal stability.

The quest of the National Peace Council to meet and negotiate a permanent solution to the misunderstanding is not only appropriate but commendable. Negotiating for a middle ground I trust would eternally put this matter to rest.

Nana Konadu Agymang Rawlings in an interview with the Daily Graphic immediately after President Mahama's 2015 State of the nation address reflected on how the Ghanaian society on its own (guided by its norms and culture) had tolerated varied religious practices over the years.

Recounting ways to deal with the resurrected debate of religious tolerance, she cited a number of instances where Christians intermarried with Muslims as well Muslims attending Catholic Schools without complaints and vice versa.

I am aware of an economic system classified as the Free Market System in a Capitalist Economic practice. Here, the forces of demand and supply on their own shape the dictate of price for any commodity, how much of a commodity is supplied and at what point they should be supplied are all determined by these invisible market forces. That is, when demand for a commodity is high, the quantity supplied by the producers rises until a balance is attained, where quantity supplied will equal quantity demanded. Such practice have over the years been rated the most effective market practice.

By implication, I hold opinion that the invisible "forces of societal norms and values" ought to be left to solve the challenge of religious tolerance in the nation. Any forced decision, no matter what will not stand the test of time.

Religion, it is said by Karl Max is the opium of the masses and atrocities stands to be committed in its name if society does not unanimously choose a path to chart.

The need for political leaders to refrain from making utterances religious in nature will to a larger extent keep society from needlessly suspecting contrary religions. Politicians it is said are scavengers who feed on the vulnerability of society purposed at reaping political favor. Evidently, President Mahama's comments on the subject of religious violations reignited this debate. The Institute of Economic Affairs in a Survey released on the 10^th March 2015 and published in the Daily Graphic briefly after the President's religious comments revealed that about eighty percent (80%) of Ghanaians believe that religious tolerance prevails in Ghana.

Continuous education of the Ghanaian society on the essence of religious tolerance is the surest way to mute negative undertones associated with religious intolerance in our dear country. Napoleon Bonaparte puts it that “The only victories which leave no regret are those which are gained over ignorance”. Ignorance has proved a great asset exploited by villains to perpetuate evil. When a society is enlightened, mischievous persons are unable to incite and feed on their vulnerability to actuate malice as the society are able to decipher and make right choices. Former British Prime Minister Benjamin Deisreali puts it that "Where knowledge ends, religion begins."

I conclude with the words of legend Scientist and philosopher Albert Einstein "A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death". It is deduced from the above that civilization is best sustained not by imposition of fear rather by the effectual bases of sympathy, education, and social ties. Such remains the only tool to social stability.

Using tools of education, societal ethics and a genuine appreciation of each regardless of their background and consensus building to resolve challenges remains the surest and most appropriate ways to resolve the dispute over religious prayer in the Ghanaian society.

Authored by: Paul Obeng Atiemo

                    paulaoben@yahoo.com

Theories of Punishment

Each society has its own way of social control for which laws are framed and punishments attached.

Punishments in whatever form is characterized by the deprivation of certain normally recognized rights, or other measures considered unpleasant. It is also a consequence for an offence and it is applied against the author of the offence.

Punishments are legitimate and effective when it is meted out pursuant to existent unambiguous and generally accepted regulations. Additionally, punishments must be compliant to laid down procedures that is, what punishment should be meted to what offence and how it should be carried out. Significantly, punishments must commensurate the offence committed. For example, murder calls for imprisonment or a death penalty. A simple assault and battery with no serious injuries is usually punished with a short jail sentence or probation and a fine (the case of Abu and Others vrs the Republic referred).

Punishments during ancient times were more severe as fear was taken as the prime instrument in preventing crime. But with change in time and development of human mind the punishment theories have become more tolerant to these criminals. K. Baier explains punishment as law-making, penalization, finding guilty and pronouncing a sentence. In a legal context law-making is a necessary condition, but it is possible to commit a wrongdoing intentionally although no law has been made, in fact it is because certain acts are considered wrong that laws are made in the first place.

Two schools of thought support the reasoning behind meting out punishments to offenders of the law including: Utilitarian and Retributive theories. While the utilitarian theory of punishment seeks to punish offenders to discourage, or "deter" future wrongdoing, the retributive theory seeks to punish offenders because they deserve to be punished.

Utilitarian philosophers argue that laws should be designed to maximize the happiness of society and to serve the greater good. According to them, because crime and punishment are inconsistent with happiness, they should be kept to a minimum. Utilitarians understand that since a crime-free society does not exist, a quest to inflict punishment must be to merit offence, purposed at preventing future re occurrence.

The utilitarian theory recognizes that punishment has consequences for both the offender and society and holds that the total good produced by the punishment should exceed the total evil. An illustration of punishment in this regard is the release of a prison inmate suffering from a debilitating illness. If the prisoner's death is imminent, society is not served by his continued confinement because he is no longer capable of committing crimes. In the case of Republic v. Rolt (1966) Crim L.R. 562, a man of 34 years with a long series of convictions was convicted of house-breaking and stealing properties worth 28pounds. He was sentenced to two years imprisonment. On receiving a report from the probation officer that the appellant would respond to probation, the court of appeal varied the sentence to a probation order.

Utilitarian philosophers believe that specific punishment for criminal conduct should be designed to deter future criminal conduct. Deterrence operates on a specific and a general level. General deterrence means that the punishment should prevent other people from committing criminal acts. Specific deterrence on the other hand means that the punishment should prevent the same person from committing crimes. Specific deterrence works in two ways. First, an offender may be put in jail or prison to physically prevent her from committing another crime for a specified period. Second, this incapacitation is designed to be so unpleasant that it will discourage the offender from repeating the criminal behavior.

Utilitarian rationale for punishment aims at rehabilitation to prevent future crime by giving offenders the ability to succeed within the confines of the law. Rehabilitative measures for criminal offenders usually include treatment for afflictions such as mental illness, chemical dependency, and chronic violent behavior. Rehabilitation also includes the use of educational programs that give offenders the knowledge and skills needed to compete in the job market.

The retributive theory dictates that offenders be punished for criminal behavior because they deserve punishment. Criminal behavior upsets the peaceful balance of society, and punishment helps to restore the balance. Law is regarded the string that binds society, and he who attempts to break the string is a danger to the society as a whole and must be punished sternly by the powerful arms of the law.

The retributive theory focuses on the crime itself as the reason for imposing punishment. Whiles utilitarian theory anchors the essence of punishment on social benefits, the retributive theory looks at transgression as the basis for punishment.

According to retributive philosophers, human beings are free and are capable of making rational decisions. An offender who is insane or otherwise incompetent should not be punished. However, a person who makes a conscious choice to upset the balance of society should be punished.

To many retributivists, punishment is justified as a form of vengeance thus wrongdoers should be forced to suffer because they have forced others to suffer. This ancient principle was expressed succinctly in the Old Testament of the Judeo-Christian Bible: "When a man causes a disfigurement in his neighbor. it shall be done to him, fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth…." Punishment is vital to the retributist because it makes the wrongdoer pay a debt to society for the ills committed and to theoretically free him off guilt and stigma.

Another rationale for punishment is denunciation. Here, punishment should be an expression of societal condemnation. The denunciation theory blends the utilitarian and retributive philosophies. It is utilitarian because the prospect of being publicly denounced serves as a deterrent. It is likewise retributive because it promotes the idea that offenders deserve to be punished.

While punishment in the United States is mostly based on retribution or expiatory theories, punishment in many African Countries is anchored on the ideals of deterrence.

Punishment may combine utilitarian ideals with that of retribution. An offender of the law may be given custodial sentence to quench the public's thirst for vengeance. At the same time, educational programs inside the prison reflect the utilitarian goal of rehabilitation.

Generally, punishment can be used as a method of reducing the incidence of criminal behavior either by deterring potential offenders or by incapacitating and preventing them from repeating the offence or by reforming them into law-abiding citizens. It is said that the enactment of any law brings about two units in the society, the law-abiders and the law-breakers. The purpose of these theories of punishment seeks to by any means transform or change these law-breakers to the group of abiders.

Punishment, whether legal or divine, needs justification because the justification of legal punishment has been given greater consideration by philosophers than has the justification of divine punishment by theologians.

Notwithstanding the two grand philosophies of punishment, a blend of the retributive and utilitarian ideals is optimum towards reshaping society.

In conclusion, I quote Justice Taylor in the case of Abu and Other v. the Republic. “In imposing sentence, it seems to me that the court has a duty to consider all aggravating and mitigating circumstances. The appellants are aged as follows: first appellant 37 years second appellant 38 years, third appellant 40 years and fourth appellant 42 years and as I have said they are first offenders. They are clearly not young persons. As first offenders, my reaction is to take a lenient look”. The appeal of the sentences of the offenders of the law was varied in accordance with the extent that each of the accused persons participated in the offence.

Who Succeeds Dr. Afari Gyan (Ghana’s Electoral Commissioner) – Article 70(2) in Perspective

The dispute which characterized the aftermath of the 2012 general elections for which reason the Supreme Court was invoked evidently has prompted the interest of many Ghanians as to who should Head the Electoral Commission after Dr. Afari Gyan retires in June 2015.

Article 70, Clause 2 of the Constitution 1992 states "The President shall, acting on the advice of the Council of State, appoint the Chairman, Deputy Chairmen, and other members of the Electoral Commission".

The constitutional provision (supra) sets out how the appointment of the Head of Ghana's Electoral Commission ought to be made; but for suspicion, the wording of Article 70(2) has been subjected to various interpretations notwithstanding the explicit wording of the provision.

Basic, yet paramount to constitutional or statutory interpretation is the literal interpretation rule as applied by Annin JSC, when he stated in the case of Sallah v. The Attorney General, GLR (1970) that "Where the words of a statute are themselves precise and unambiguous, they must be expounded in their ordinary and natural sense". Same rule was applied by Sowah JSC in the case of Tuffour V. AG (1980) GLR 637-667.

Many schools of thought have emerged on how Article 70(2) of the Constitution 1992 should be interpreted. 

A section has argued that the effect of the punctuation (comma) after the "shall" in article 70(2) applies to the appointing authority of the President and not esteeming the advisory role of the Council of State. The President therefore is required to make the appointment of the Electoral Commissioner with or without consideration to the advice of the Council of State. In effect, the proponents are of the view that, appointment of the Electoral Commissioner is the sole mandate of the President.

Another school of thought argues that the appointment made by the President pursuant to article 70(2) must be subject to the advice of the Council of State; therefore, if the Council of State objects to the President's choice, the President has no other option than to reconsider his stance and re-nominate. It is argued again that, it is the Council of State that makes the nominations for the President to merely make a ceremonial appointment. Impliedly, the vested power of the Council of State to reject or accept the President’s nominee positions them as the appointing authority of the Electoral Commissioner.

For all intents and purposes, it is undisputed that the President will take into consideration a wide range of issues before confirming the appointment of the Electoral Commissioner. 

The 1968 Constitutional Commission stating the usefulness of the Council of State indicated at paragraph 365 & 366 of the 1968 Proposals of Constitutional Commission for a Constitution for Ghana, that “…The functions that have been entrusted to the President are of great importance. They impose onerous responsibilities on the President. We do not think anyone man, even the President, should be asked to shoulder such responsibilities single-handed. That is essentially the reason for recommending such a fairly small body of prominent citizens of proven character and ability to advise the President.”

The Committee of Experts that drafted the 1992 Constitution at paragraph 43 & 45 of its report stated that “recent constitutional arrangements in Ghana have recognized the validity of the case for a non-partisan advisory body, comprising eminent personalities, which would counsel and aid the principal organs of state in the discharge of their constitutional functions. This institution is analogous to the Council of Elders in our traditional political system.  45.“However, except for certain categories of appointments, any advice or recommendations furnished by the Council of State was not binging.” 

Framers of the 1969 and 1979 Constitution(s) in Article 30(2) and Article 37(2) respectively provided that "The Electoral Commissioner shall be appointed by the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the Council of state". 

To my mind, the draftsmen of the 1969 and 1979 constitution(s) prescribed the same procedure for the appointment of the Electoral Commissioner and its membership just as it is provided in Article 70(2) of the 1992 Constitution. The varied use of "acting in accordance with" and "acting on the advice of" in the 1969/1979 and 1992 Constitutions respectively have the same effect (from a literal view).  "Acting on the advice of" means "compliance to stated instructions issued" and "acting in accordance with" means "acting in conformity with" (Macmillan Dictionary – 2009-15 referred).

A fair interpretation of the phrase "the President shall, acting on the advice of the Council of State" as contained in Article 70(2) therefore would warrant a look at how this wording in other parts of the constitution 1992, is interpreted and applied. 

Article 144(2) states, "the other Supreme Court Justices are to be appointed by the President acting on the advice of the Judicial Council, in consultation with the Council of State and with the approval of Parliament". There has been appointments and swearing in of judges to the Supreme Court under this fourth republican Constitution although some of the appointments have in the past been characterized with partisan protests.  

An enacted precedent on appointing an Electoral Commissioner in Ghana under the fourth republican constitution is that of Dr. Afari Gyan who after serving as a member of the Committee of Experts (committee that drafted the 1992 constitution) was appointed as deputy Electoral Commission and later as Head of the Electoral Commission when the constitution 1992 came into force. 

Evidently, the constitution 1992 vests so much powers in the president.

The 2009 Constitution Review Commission stating their reasons on the need for a review of the constitution 1992 (page 6 & 7 of its Maiden Press Conference Report) amongst many admitted that “flaws in constitutional design and practice have led to too much power concentrated in the president, thus, undermining systems of checks and balances. Executive dominance has impeded the effectiveness of oversight institutions such as Parliament and independent constitutional commissions."  7. “research conducted by many non-governmental organizations reveals that there are potentially close to 40 changes that need to be made to our constitution.  (1) a review of the provisions of chapter 8 of the constitution to determine whether there should be a curtailment of the exercise powers of the Executive president".

It seems that the Committee of Experts, were either influenced by a quest to make the once military leader who had switched garments (military to Democratic leader) as powerful as he was while a military leader or they were influenced by the paternalistic culture of the Ghanaian society (all decisions are made by the father at home) as a result, vesting such powers in the President to make unchallenged unilateral decisions.

It is usually the practice that Presidents make appointments including heads of constitutionally established institutions. In the United States of America for instance, the membership/head of the Federal Electoral Commission is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. In the United Kingdom, the Speaker's Committee, tasked with the duty to scrutinize the Electoral Commission appoints the Head of its Electoral Commission. Notwithstanding the similarities, the distinction is that whiles a bi-partisan body is required by law to confirm the President’s nominee (in the USA), in Ghana, the Council of State, whose membership, many of whom is appointed by the President is required to work hand in hand in the appointment of the Electoral Commissioner.

The constitution 1992 provides in article 2(1)(a)(b) that “a person who alleges that (a)an enactment or anything contained in or done under the authority of that or any other enactment or (b) any act or omission of any person; is inconsistent with or is in contravention of a provision of this Constitution, may bring an action in the Supreme Court for a declaration to that effect”. By this, until the above provision is exhausted and a contrary determination is made by the Supreme Court, the guiding precedent remains that the President makes the appointment (fair or foul). 

The stakes on the outcome of the 2016 general elections is high hence the quest for political parties to unreservedly have an interest in who becomes the head of the Electoral Commission.

If there ever is a test case to justify the need to trim down the powers of the President, I trust this is it. Institutions must be made to work devoid of political interference. I am of the opinion that the appointment of persons into sensitive offices such as the Electoral Commission must be vested in an independent body of persons, the Council of State whose nominations should be confirmed by a bi - partisan institution, preferably Parliament House. This way, I trust elements of politically motivated suspicion will, to a greater extent, be minimized.


Atiemo Obeng Paul
The author is a Law Student at Central University College
paulaoben@yahoo.com

OPEN LETTER TO THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY (NYA): MR. PAAROCK VANPERCY

Dear Sir,

FOR YOUR ATTENTION: BLATANT DEFIANCE OF NYAs DIRECTIVES BY SOME TELECOM COMPANIES IN GHANA

I bring to your attention the continual junk messages and unsolicited auto play phone calls placed by some telecommunication networks (Airtel, etc) contrary to the directive issued by your outfit (i.e. there shall be an end to junk/unsolicited messages and calls from mobile telecom companies from August, 1st 2013) and the customer rights rules displayed on your website.

Sir, the impunity gestured by these telecom networks, to terrorize clients with junk messages and auto play short coded phone calls in a quest for attention is nauseating. Sadly, such recklessness and abuse comes amidst poor services and dubious extortionist operandi adopted these Network Companies to subjugate clients unto a state of non-complaining.

Sir, the concept of Mobile Number Portability as introduced by your outfit was hailed, however the associated effect of poor services and clandestine extortion amongst telecom operators has rendered its introduction an ineffective tool to remedy the existing problems.

Sir, I called your office and brought to your attention the abuse suffered from two networks: Airtel Ghana (who plague me with junk txt messages and auto play recorded phone calls from coded numbers including: 888, 06060, 888,0561, 07070, 450, GAME etc.) and Vodafone Ghana (who also sends me junk messages in a quest to market their products).

Sir, Vodafone Ghana called to express concern and to remedy the situation, (effectively, the rate of the messages has tolerably minimized) but for AIRTEL Ghana, my complaint seemingly has triggered a 'compounded - torture' referencing that they have since intensified sending the junk messages and the coded auto-play-recorded calls. This in effect makes me wonder the efficacy of your outfit's control over these telecom companies in Ghana. It's a Shame.

Sir, I am at my and limits wondering where next to turn referencing that notifying your outfit of a difficulty seemingly triggers a 'compounded-torture' effect. (If the directives of the National Communications Authority can be disregarded with impunity, who else can help).

Ceasing the occasion, I pray Hon. Omane Boamah, Minister of Communications (if within his remits), to talk sanity unto Airtel Ghana as well as the other telecom companies to desist from sending junk messages and disturbing our peace with needless auto phone calls. Rather, they should focus at providing improved services to the advantage of its users.

Above all, I propose a radical shake up of the National Communications Authority purposed to quicken them unto duty.

Paul Obeng Atiemo
Email: paulaoben@yahoo.com