The Human Rights Division of the High Court in Accra has struck out an application by embattled former National Food Buffer Stock Company (NAFCO) Chief Executive Officer, Hanan Abdul-Wahab Aludiba, who was seeking to compel the BNI and the Attorney-General to produce him in court.
The application was struck out as moot following his release on bail.
Last Tuesday, the Court declined to hear an ex-parte motion filed by lawyers for the applicant, led by Godfred Yeboah Dame, a former Attorney-General, to have the matter heard in the absence of the respondents.
Instead of hearing arguments without the BNI and the Attorney-General, the Court said it would rather hear the application on notice to both the BNI and the Attorney-General.
The Court had adjourned the case to Friday, July 10, 2026. However, Aludiba was released on Wednesday.
When the case was called on Friday, July 10, 2026, the Court, presided over by Justice Barbara Tetteh-Charway, noted that it had sighted a notice of withdrawal filed by counsel for the applicant, dated July 9.
The Attorney-General who was represented by Rabiatu Abdulai, an assistant Staff Officer at EOCO, told the Court that the notice of withdrawal had only just come to her attention.
Consequently, the application was struck out as withdrawn.
Background
On Tuesday, Godfred Dame rose to move an ex-parte application against both the BNI and the Attorney-General.
The lawyers wanted the Human Rights Division of the High Court in Accra to compel the respondents, the BNI and the Attorney-General, to produce their client, who was arrested on July 4, in court.
He argued that their client had been “unlawfully detained” and that the respondents ought to be compelled to produce him and justify his continued detention.
But Justice Barbara Tetteh-Charway, the presiding judge, said the nature of the allegations required the Court to hear from the respondents.
Mr. Dame said he was moving an ex-parte application pursuant to Order 56, Rule 1, sub-rule 2 of CI 47. He argued that 78 hours had passed since the arrest without the applicant’s release, and that the matter was urgent and fell within human rights grounds.
According to him, where a person is allegedly unlawfully detained, the Court ought to compel the respondents to come and justify the detention.
The Court, however, said it had only heard one side and needed to hear from the respondents before making any order. She noted that she did not have the full facts on what transpired at the specialist court.
Counsel insisted that granting an ex-parte order would not shut the respondents out, as they would still be required to justify the continued detention.
He told the Court they had attached a Facebook post by the Deputy Attorney-General dated July 4 to buttress their claims.
Counsel further argued that their client had not been charged since July 4 and that his continued detention violated Article 14(3) of the Constitution.
He described it as a typical human rights situation and urged the Court not to turn its back on the applicant. He also prayed the Court to order that his client be produced on Thursday, July 9.
Justice Tetteh-Charway said the Court could not make consequential orders on an ex-parte application it had not heard.
She directed that the application be brought on notice, which the lawyers indicated had already been filed, with the return date set for July 10.
The Court said, “I am satisfied that the decision I am taking is backed by law.”
She directed counsel to pursue the motion on notice already filed for Friday and adjourned the case to Thursday, July 10, 2026, at 9:00 a.m.
Aludiba was arrested on July 4, 2026. His lawyers contend that his continued detention without charge is unconstitutional. His wife was in court to represent him.
