[1998]DLSC15014 • April 22, 1998 • Supreme Court •
EDUSEL(NO 2) vs. ATTORNEY-GENERAL
The applicant, a Ghanaian citizen, had his passport withdrawn by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Bureau of National Investigation following investigations into his activities. He was sent to the United States in an exchange arrangement. Upon seeking to return to Ghana, he requested the return of his old passport to apply for a new one but was denied. He filed suit invoking the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction seeking declarations that certain sections of the Passport and Travel Certificates Decree, 1967 (NLCD 155) were unconstitutional and an order for the return of his passport.
read moreBAMFORD-ADDO JSC. This is an application by the applicant asking for a review of the decision of this court dated 13 February 1996, and reported as Edusei v Attorney-General [ I996-97] SCGL I, which held that the court had no jurisdiction to hear the case brought before it in the above mentioned case. Since jurisdiction is a fundamental issue, the absence of which would render any decision of a court nu) and void, it is of utmost importance for a court to ensure that in any case brought before it, it has the requisite jurisdiction to hear and determine that case. Where there is lack of jurisdiction, a court ought to decline jurisdiction. In the same manner, where a court has jurisdiction in any case, it should accept jurisdiction and adjudicate on it. It would be wrong in such a case to decline jurisdiction, as this would result in injustice to an applicant and would constitute an exceptional circumstance for which a review would be granted under article 133 of the 1992 Constitution....