Skip to main content

Anger; new income tax measure takes toll on Judges salary

Anger is brewing in the judiciary over the impact of mid-year tax measures on the salaries of judges.
It would be recalled that government announced a 35 percent tax on persons earning over 10,000 cedis as part of measures to rake in more revenue.
Even though the move has been hailed as forward looking, Gold News understands it is affecting the living conditions of judges.
Article 127(5) of the 1992 Constitution states;
“The salary, allowances, privileges and rights in respect of leave of absence, gratuity, pension and other conditions of service of a Justice of the superior court or any judicial officer or other person exercising judicial power, shall not be varied to his disadvantage.”
This constitutional provision, I am made to understand imposes an obligation on government to ensure that its policies do not unduly negatively affect the living conditions of judges but that seems not to be the case at this time.
Information I have gathered indicates  some judges are stewing in anger over the imposition of 35 percent on persons earning 10,000 cedis and above.
The move has gravely affected the salaries of most judges with some of them considering suing government over the move because they believe it violates Article 127(5) of the 1992 Constitution which regulates their conditions of service.
My sources tell me the tax measure has significantly eroded the salaries of Justices of the Superior Courts.
In some cases, the measure has wiped off over 2000 cedis from the take home pays of the judges, a variation that the Justices say is a disadvantage to them.
The Justices, I understand expected government to at least sit down with the judiciary to discuss the impact of the tax measure on them and putting in place mitigating measures before going ahead to implement them.
It is unclear whether the Judicial Service would take up the matter with the government with the assumption of the legal year but information available is that some judges
are seriously considering dragging government to the Supreme Court.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sandy and Gibeleen's task; Improving sickle cell care

Two sisters Sandy Ayivor and Gibeleen Amponsah Ninpong are hoping to change the face of sickle cell care in the country within five years. This they hope to do through their GNS (Gibeleen & Sandy) Foundation. Ghana’s foremost sickle cell clinic is a one block facility comparable to the ones used as clinics in villages. The most worrying aspect is that the same facility is supposed to be the Ghana Institute of Clinical Genetics. The Institute is supposed to be the leading center for diagnosis and care for persons suffering from genetic conditions or ones inherited. Even though the Institute has some of the best brains in clinical genetics running and working in the facility, they have been reduced to providing only sickle cell care. A former Director of the Institute Dr. Edeghonghon Olayemi says the GNS Foundation first contacted the clinic and demanded to know the challenges of the company. He revealed that a list of the challenges confronting the ...
Post a Comment
Read more

SC to determine fate of "unexecuted" but "ratified" US-Ghana agreement

Barely three days after its ratification under controversial circumstances, the Defense Cooperation agreement between the Governments of the United States and Ghana is facing its first constitutional test. The agreement is the subject is a suit filed by Ashanti Regional Youth organizer of the National Democratic Congress Yaw Brogya Gyamfi. The government led by the Minister of Defence Dominic Nittiwul successfully pushed the agreement through parliament with the overwhelming support of all New patriotic Party MPs despite concerns over its constitutionality. The Minority led by its leader Haruna Iddrisu had questioned the suitability of the agreement for a parliamentary approval because it has not been duly signed and therefore does not meet the constitutional requirement of execution in order for it to be ratified. Article 75(2) which gives Parliament the authority to ratify agreements entered into by the executive reads; A treaty, agreement or convention executed by...
1 comment
Read more