Accra, May 27, GNA - The Human Rights Fast Track High Court on Thurs day gave the Director of Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) and two othe r officials of the bureau up to Thursday, June 24 to appear before it. The court also threatened to issue a bench warrant for the arrest of

the three officials if they failed to show up in court at the next adjour ned date.

The three are Mr Yaw Donkor, Director of BNI, Mr Stephen Brokwa and Ms Josephine Gandawiri.

This was after Nene Amegatcher, Counsel for Stephen Asamoah Boateng,

former Minister of Information and National Orientation had prayed the co urt to invite the Director of BNI and the two officials to appear before it. Asamoah-Boateng, his wife, Zuleika Jennifer Lorwiah, Nana Yaw Asamoah-Boateng and Andrew Asamoah-Boateng their children have instituted

contempt action against the three respondents, Yaw Donkor, Josephine Gandawiri, Stephen Abrokwa, and the Attorney Generals (A-G)Department for preventing them from travelling outside the country o n two occasions without recourse to a court order.

Nene Amegatcher said since the beginning of the trial, the Director of BNI and the two others had refused to appear before the court to answer charges relating to the case. He asked the prosecution to show an undertaking to bring the three persons to court. Ms Helen Kwawukume, Chief State Attorney in her response told the co urt that Mr Yaw Donkor is on a national assignment at Bunkpurugu Yunyoo in th e Northern Region. She said with regard to Mr Brokwa and Ms Gandawiri, she could not explained why they did not show up in court even though she had spoken wi th them. Ms Kwawukume said she could only speak for Mr Brokwa and Ms Gandawiri

but for the Director of the BNI she cannot guarantee.

The contempt action was instituted when the four applicants were prevented from travelling outside the country on June 14, 2009 without an y court order or warrant. They therefore filed an application seeking an injunction to restrai n the BNI from preventing them from travelling without a court order. While the application was pending, they claimed the BNI again disregarded the action and prevented them from travelling again at a late r date.

The matter had been embroiled in some confusion when, on August 18, 2009, there was controversy over direct proof of service of the contempt summons on the Director of BNI and the two other officials. While court records and applicants' lawyer indicated that the three respondents had been served with the contempt summons, the A-G's Departme nt said otherwise. Similarly, the records of proof of service of the court and that of applicants' lawyer did not tally, as the two records indicated names of different bailiffs, with different dates of serving the contemnors. The case has been adjourned to June 24.