[2007]DLSC10854 • December 21, 2007 • Supreme Court •
THE REPUBLIC vs. HIGH COURT (FAST TRACK) ACCRA EX-PARTE: COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHT AND ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE (HONOURABLE DR. RICHARD ANANE INTERESTED PARTY)
The Supreme Court was called upon to determine the proper interpretation of the term 'Complaint' under Article 218a of the 1992 Constitution, specifically whether CHRAJ requires a formal complaint by an identifiable individual or corporate body to initiate an investigation, or whether expressions of dissatisfaction through media and public fora suffice. This arose after the High Court, Accra, purported to interpret 'Complaint' in a manner that was quashed by the Supreme Court on 30th October 2007.
read moreI have had the benefit of reading in advance the decision of my noble and eminent President- The Chief Justice, as well as those of my other learned senior colleagues, - Justice Brobbey and Dr. Date-Baah. Their decisions have exhausted whatever there is to be said. The Rules and Cannons of Interpretation have been fully discussed. I fully agree with the decision read by the Honourable President and Justice. I will therefore concern myself only with a little of what I think of the issue before us. i.e.: The Supreme Court on 30th October, 2007 after quashing the decision of the High Court, Accra, which purported to interprete the word “Complaint” in Article 218 (a) of the 1992 Constitution, formulated the following issue for determination under Article 130(2) of the Constitution, i.e.:- “For a Complaint within the meaning of Article 218(a) of the 1992 Constitution to form the basis for investigation by the Commission on Human Right and Administrative Justice – must it...