TAMALE POLY APPEALS AGAINST RULING (SPREAD)

THE Tamale Polytechnic has appealed against the ruling of the Tamale High Court on the case in which some lecturers of the polytechnic were dismissed for their alleged involvement in the sexual harassment of some female students in the school.
One of the counsels for the defendants, Mr Issah Mahmudu explained that their clients were not satisfied with the judgement on the case, for which reason they would pursue it at the Appeals Court.
Following a newspaper report of an alleged sexual harassment of some female students of the polytechnic in the 2007 academic year, the governing council of the polytechnic set up a four-member committee to investigate the matter.
And upon the recommendations of the committee, a dismissal letter was issued to the affected lecturers.
The lecturers however filed a motion for judicial review of the case against the defendants at the Tamale High Court in October 2007.
Subsequently, the Court presided over by Justice Lawrence Mensal on May 13 this year, gave a ruling in favour of the plaintiffs.
According to the Judge, the committee set up by the governing council on the respondent was flawed for which reason, “I hereby declare the findings of the committee null and void.”
Justice Mensah also declared the termination of the appointment void and that the applicants were entitled to collect 24 months damages.
He further recommended that they be paid all their entitlements under their contract of service and a cost of GH¢1,000 each.
The affected lecturers are Adam Bawah Yussif, Abdulai Abdul-Mumin, Abdul-Azeez Mikhail and Adams Issahaku.
In a related development, the Daily Graphic would like to acknowledge that portions on the matter as published on page 53 in its May 18, 2009 edition in connection with the ruling on the case contained some inaccuracies.
In the said story, the paper inadvertently stated that the polytechnic was ordered to pay two years salary entitlements in advance, and 16 months salaries for damages to the lecturers.
The Court did not also order, as published,that the dismissed lecturers be paid 15 months’ salary each for damages neither did it recommend the setting up of a high powered body to investigate the daily administration of the school.
The errors are very much regretted. We apologise to the authorities of the polytechnic for the inconvenience the said story might have caused them.