By Grace Zigah
The Greater Accra Regional Minister, Linda Obenewaa Akweley Ocloo, is facing the prospect of contempt proceedings after the Adentan High Court (2) ordered that she be served with a motion seeking her committal to prison for allegedly defying a court injunction in a contentious land dispute involving the proposed relocation of the Dodowa Market.
The development marks a significant escalation in a legal battle that has pitted private land ownership claims against government plans to undertake development projects in the Shai-Osudoku area of the Greater Accra Region.
In a ruling, the court directed that the Regional Minister be served with a motion on notice seeking her committal for contempt as well as a hearing notice requiring her appearance before the court.
The court further granted an application for substituted service after attempts to effect personal service proved difficult.
Under the court’s directive, copies of the motion and hearing notice are to be posted on the notice board of the Adentan High Court and on the walls of the Minister’s residence or alternatively left with an adult occupant at the residence.
The court also ordered that copies be served on the Chief Director of the Greater Accra Regional Coordinating Council and published in the newspaper.
The case, titled Republic v. Linda Obenewaa Akweley Ocloo (Defendant), Ex Parte Bernard Oduro, suing through his lawful attorney Felix Mishio Ankonam, has been adjourned to June 24, 2026, when the Minister is expected to appear and explain why she should not be held in contempt of court.
At the centre of the dispute is a parcel of land which Bernard Oduro claims ownership of and which has become the subject of an ongoing legal battle between him and the Attorney-General.
The controversy intensified after government authorities announced plans to relocate the Dodowa Market and undertake development works on the disputed land as part of broader interventions in the area.
The land is also linked to government plans to fence portions of the Dodowa Forest, a commitment the Regional Minister reportedly made during engagements with residents and stakeholders in the Shai-Osudoku Municipality.
However, according to court documents, the land remains the subject of pending litigation and is therefore protected by an interlocutory injunction issued by the court.
In an affidavit supporting the contempt application, Bernard Oduro stated that on October 22, 2025, he secured an interlocutory injunction restraining the Regional Minister and other parties from entering, developing or interfering with the land until the substantive matter is finally determined by the court.
According to him, the injunction order was duly served on both the Regional Minister and the Chief Director of the Greater Accra Regional Coordinating Council.
Despite the court order, Oduro alleged that around April 17, 2026, he discovered that portions of the disputed land were being cleared and graded by workers.
He claimed that investigations subsequently revealed that those carrying out the activities were acting on the instructions of the Regional Minister.
Concerned that the works violated the injunction, Oduro reported the matter to the Ghana Police Service, leading to the arrest of some of the individuals engaged in the development activities.
However, the applicant alleged that on April 24, 2026, the Regional Minister personally visited the Police Headquarters and directed that the arrested individuals be released because they were carrying out work under her authority.
According to the affidavit, the Minister further indicated in the presence of the Director of Special Operations that the development works would continue despite the existence of the injunction because the land was required for the relocation of the Dodowa Market.
The applicant contends that legal advice and warnings from his lawyers regarding the implications of violating a court order were disregarded.
Oduro further alleged that on April 28, 2026, the Minister granted interviews to two Accra-based radio stations during which she openly acknowledged awareness of both the pending court case and the injunction order.
Despite that knowledge, he claims she publicly indicated that her plans for the land would proceed.
According to the applicant, the Minister sought to justify her actions on the basis that she was carrying out a national assignment, although he argues that no public office holder has the authority to disregard lawful court orders.
The applicant therefore maintains that the Minister’s conduct amounts to deliberate and wilful disobedience of the orders of the court and constitutes contempt.
He argues that such actions undermine the authority of the judiciary and the rule of law by creating the impression that government officials can place themselves above judicial directives.
The case has attracted considerable public attention because it touches on the constitutional relationship between government authority and judicial independence.
