REPUBLIC vs. HIGH COURT REGISTRAR, KUMASI AND ANOTHER; EX PARTE YIADOM I

The applicant, Nana Abena Konadu I, queenmother of Effiduase, sought to enforce her rights against the alleged unlawful usurpation of the position of chief by the second respondent, David Osei Amankwa (Nana Osei Worae II). The dispute arose from conflicting claims over the rightful occupant of the Effiduase stool. The applicant initially filed an application under Order 59 of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules seeking an injunction to restrain the respondent from usurping the office and exercising the functions of the Effiduasehene. The High Court dismissed the application, holding it lacked jurisdiction to grant the injunction sought in chieftaincy matters. The applicant then sought relief from the Supreme Court, including certiorari to quash the High Court ruling and directions on the High Court's jurisdiction in chieftaincy matters.

JUDGMENT OF ADADE J.S.C. Adade J.S.C. delivered the ruling of the court. As we understand the case for the applicant, there are two parts to this application, plus a possible third. The first part is a convoluted, indirect and concealed application for certiorari under article 119 of the Constitution, 1979 asking this court “for an order quashing the ruling of Quashie-Sam J. of 18 October 1979, upon an application in the nature of quo warranto brought by the applicant herein against the second respondent herein.” The second part of the application, also purporting to be made under the same article 119 of the Constitution, 1979, shored up by article 118 of the same Constitution, asks the court to give directions to the High Court with respect to the High Court’s jurisdiction in chieftaincy matters. We have put “chieftaincy matters” ‘in italics because out of this term arises the possible third request. For if this court should accede to the second application a...