The former Director of the Pharmacy Department of the Korle Bu Teaching Hospital has filed contempt proceedings against the CEO of the hospital
The dismissed Director of Pharmacy at the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital, Elizabeth Bruce has dragged the management of the hospital to the Human Rights Court for contempt after she was sacked.
Mrs Elizabeth Bruce wants the CEO, Dr. Gilbert Buckle, and Chairman of the Board of Directors, Prof. Anthony Mawuli Sallar, to be convicted and imprisoned for bringing the court’s authority into disrepute.
The application for committal for contempt, filed on the applicant’s behalf by her lawyer, Mr. Godfred Yeboah Dame, wants the court to imprison Prof. Sallar and Dr. Buckle.
Another relief being sought from the court is the imposition of “a very heavy fine” on the hospital as an entity.
Mrs Bruce, in April 2015, took legal action after she was interdicted in January 2015 for allegedly misappropriating funds at the Pharmacy Department.
The court was yet to hear the matter, after the hospital had filed its defence, but the respondents proceeded to dismiss her in June 2015.
Hearing of the contempt application has been fixed for July 8, 2015.
Elizabeth Bruce’s Affidavit in support
"That just before the action will be set down for hearing in accordance with rule 67 of the High Court rule CI 47, a copy of a letter purporting to dismiss me as Director of Pharmacy of the hospital was being read on an Accra based radio station.
That subsequently, I discovered that a press statement by the board and management of the hospital of whom the first and second respondent as respective heads dated 17th June, 2015 released to all press houses had purported to dismiss me following the forensic audit exercise and the administrative enquiry’s committee’s proceedings.
That is it not worthy that a validity of the basis for my purported dismissal was the very subject matter of the action which is currently pending before this honourable court.
That I am further advised by Counsel and verily believe same to be true that the act of the respondents in dismissing me while the substantive suit seeking to question the validity of every aspect of the purported disciplinary measures being by the third respondent was pending, was intended to frustrate me from a pursuit of the action, and also to prejudice the hearing and fair determination of the suit.
That I am advised by Counsel to and verily believe same to be true that the conduct of the respondent was willful and clearly intended to subvert or overreach any judgment to be rendered by this honourable court and same was out of disrespect for the court’s authority in this suit."