[1994]DLSC771 • May 3, 1994 • Supreme Court •
NEW PATRIOTIC PARTY vs. RAWLINGS AND ANOTHER
The New Patriotic Party challenged the legality of appointments made by President Rawlings on 17 September 1993 of district secretaries under section 211 of the Local Government Law, 1988 (PNDCL 207), contending that these appointments contravened articles 242, 243, 246 and 247 of the 1992 Constitution. This followed a prior Supreme Court decision that elections for district chief executives, as then proposed, were unconstitutional. The plaintiff argued that the President lacked authority to appoint district secretaries, as the Constitution provided for district chief executives appointed with assembly approval, not district secretaries appointed by the executive.
read moreOn 16 September 1993 this court unanimously decided in New Patriotic Party v Electoral Commission [1993-94] 1 GLR 124, SC, ante, that elections which were then due to be held by the Electoral Commission set up under article 43 of the Constitution, 1992 for the purpose of approving nominations purported to have been made by President Rawlings, the first-named defendant, under article 243(1) to the office of district chief executive, would violate the Constitution, 1992 as the district assemblies established under the provisions of section 3(1) of the Local Government Law, 1988 (PNDCL 207) had no power to give such approval. The next day, it was announced that the first-named defendant had appointed those same persons as district secretaries under section 21(1) of PNDCL 207. The plaintiff says that this was unlawful and it has filed this writ to challenge his right to do so. The Attorney-General is named as the second defendant. As formulated in its writ and statement of case, the com...