The Volta Regional Minister, Mr. Yao Archibald and the Minister of Lands and Natural Resources, Mr. John Peter Amewu, and five others have been dragged to the Ho High Court for contempt.
They are said to have flouted the orders of the court restraining the New Patriotic Party (NPP) from holding the regional conference which elected new regional executives in April this year.
The others are the newly elected Regional Chairman of the party, Mr Kofi Makafui Woanya, former Acting Regional Chairman, Esther Edjeani, Chairman of the Vetting Committee, Bob Charles Agbontor, Volta Regional Director of Electoral Commission, Selormey Dogbe and the Hohoe Municipal Director of the Electoral Commission (EC), Mr. Thomas Karkari.
The case which was called on Thursday at the court presided over by Justice Eric Baah, had to be adjourned to June 18 because not all the defendants had been served copies of the contempt notice.
The Ho High Court prior to the elections had placed an injunction on the conference following an application by a disqualified aspirant, George Kofi Boateng who was contesting for the chairmanship position.
Mr Kofi Boateng, a former Regional Secretary of the party was disqualified alongside three other aspirants by the vetting committee chaired by Bob Charles Agbontor in April.
The ex-parte motion was a move by Mr. Boateng to seek redress for what he described as an unfair disqualification from the contest.
However, despite having knowledge of the injunction, the respondents were said to have held the elections thereby exhibiting gross disrespect to the court for which the applicant wants the court to punish them.
Application to set aside injunction order
Meanwhile earlier in court, the party through its lawyer, Mr. Ernest Gaewu had moved an application to set aside the said interlocutory injunction on grounds that the order was made in error and without jurisdiction.
Mr. Gaewu had argued that the court order for the plaintiff to serve the NPP of an exparte motion for injunction together with the writ of summons and a hearing notice was not carried out as it was statutory demanded, and therefore that rendered the order of the court void.
According to him, the administrative officer at the regional office who was served a copy of the notice was not the right person to receive documents on behalf of the party.
However the lawyer Mr Atsu Agbakpe for the plaintiff argued that once there was proof of service on an appointed officer of the party at the regional level, it was a ‘good service ‘and therefore the court should dismiss the application.