[2001]DLSC1226 • July 25, 2001 • Supreme Court •
REPUBLIC vs. CENTRAL REGIONAL HOUSE OF CHIEFS JUDICIAL COMMITTEE; EX PARTE AABA
The case arose from a chieftaincy dispute over succession to the Omanhene stool of the Edina Traditional Area. The judicial committee of the Central Regional House of Chiefs announced its decision on 23 September 1996, upholding the petitioner's claim but reserved reasons for a later date. Reasons were delivered on 3 December 1996, well beyond the six-week period stipulated by applicable procedural rules. The appellants challenged the judgment on grounds of failure to deliver reasons simultaneously with the judgment and delay in delivering reasons, alleging breach of natural justice and error of law.
read moreThe issues for determination in this appeal are of great interest. They are also not very simple. They include the following which I identify as the major ones: (1) Is the judicial committee of the regional house of chiefs bound in law by rule 11 of the Chieftaincy (National and Regional Houses of Chiefs) Procedure Rules, 1972 (CI 27) to give the reasons for its judgment at the time that the judgment is announced? Otherwise stated, is it wrong for the judicial committee to announce its judgment and reserve for another date the reasons for the judgment? (2) Does the law require the judicial committee to deliver judgment within a limited period of time after the close of the hearing of the case? (3) If there is a time limit for the delivery of a judgment, then what is the effect on a judgment in which reasons are not stated but reserved and not given within the period for delivery of the judgment? The first issue was raised before the High Court; issue (2) came up in the Cour...