Sources close to the Customs, Excise and Preventive Service (CEPS) at the week-end disclosed that a dispute had developed between the CEPS and one of its officers that could harm the service.
They also revealed that CHRAJ had come into the dispute in a manner that was likely to harm the credibility of the commission. The sources related the case as follows: The officer was transferred in February 1995 from Cape Coast to take responsibility over a newly-created department at the CEPS Headquarters, Accra.
For that reason, the officer was made an Acting Assistant Commissioner, the position reserved for the head of the department . After a while, the officer requested to be transferred to another department. On account of that, he was reverted to the position of Chief Collector, his substantive rank.
The department he requested to be transferred to has a substantive head who is an Assistant Commissioner. According to the sources, the officer petitioned direct to the CHRAJ as having been demoted and CHRAJ asked the management of CEPS to comment.
The management indicated that promotion was not a legal issue but depended wholly on merit. Besides, substantive appointment to Assistant Commissioner is the responsibility of the Board of Directors of CEPS.
In another case, the sources said the same officer was transferred to occupy a vacant position of a Chief Collector as next-in-command to the Assistant Commissioner at Bolgatanga. The officer immediately again petitioned CHRAJ and claimed to have been victimised.
CHRAJ again requested to CEPS management to comment. The CEPS management replied and held the view that transfers are the prerogative of the management and effect every employee in the service.
Insofar as the aims and objectives of the Service were concerned, the management said, somebody else(another Ghanaian and a human (being) would have to be transferred there, anyway, and therefore there was no question of victimisation.
For the third time, the sources disclosed that the same officer petitioned CHRAJ over some promotions.
CHRAJ once again requested the management to produce the files of 19 out of a number of officers who were promoted, to find out whether they were justified.
The sources hinted that the officer and Mr. Emile Short were both practising as lawyers at Cape Coast prior to the appointment of Mr. Short as Commissioner of CHRAJ.
The CEPS had occasion to query the officer for using his official working hours to do private legal practice while on duty at Cape Coast the sources disclosed.
