APALOO vs. EDWARD WIREDU

The plaintiff sued the defendant, then Acting Chief Justice of Ghana, challenging his eligibility to serve as a superior court judge and seeking declarations that his original appointment as a High Court judge by the National Liberation Council was wrongful, that any later advancement based on that appointment was void, that his recall to the bench without judicial exoneration from alleged corruption was null, and a perpetual injunction restraining him from acting as a superior court judge. The plaintiff also filed an interlocutory injunction application to restrain the defendant from presenting himself to Parliament for vetting as Chief Justice and to restrain Parliament from vetting him. This is borne out by the opening part of the judgment where the court reproduced the endorsed reliefs and stated that “The crux of the plaintiff’s claim and the application for injunction was that at all material times that the defendant has been working as a superior court judge for the past 30 years or so, he was not qualified to work as such so the President could not have nominated him for the post of Chief Justice of Ghana.”