[1999]DLSC16014 • June 23, 1999 • Supreme Court •
CHRAJ vs. ATTORNEY-GENERAL
The Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) filed a writ seeking a declaration that section 352 of the transitional provisions of the 1992 Constitution empowered it to restore properties confiscated by the State during the AFRC and PNDC regimes, including confiscations made by special courts or tribunals established under those regimes. The case of Col CR Tachie-Menson, whose properties were confiscated by the AFRC Special Court, was cited as an example. The Attorney-General opposed the claim, denying CHRAJ's jurisdiction to review or restore properties confiscated by courts or tribunals established under the AFRC or PNDC.
read moreRULING CHARLES HAYFRON-BENJAMIN JSC delivered the judgment of the court. On 31 July 1998 this court dismissed (with the reasons reserved), the writ of the plaintiff, ie the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice - invoking the assistance of this court to re solve an apparent conflict in the relative positions of the parties vis-a-vis their respective functions under the 1992 Constitution. For, whereas the plaintiff is, "in the performance of its functions, not subject to the direction or control of any person or authority", the defendant, the Attorney General, on the other hand, is a member of the executive branch of government and the chief legal adviser to the government. The principles of the separation of powers, to which to a great extent our Constitution gives support, enjoin this court as arbiters of conflicts within the Constitution, in the interpretation or enforcement thereof, not to adopt attitudes and positions, which may appear to incline us into p.....