MR. SAMUEL OKUDZETO ABLAKWA AND DR. EDWARD KOFI OMANE BOAMAH vs. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND HON. JAKE OTANKA OBETSEBI-LAMPTEY

The applicants, who had earlier invoked the Supreme Court’s constitutional/enforcement jurisdiction in relation to state or public property connected with Hon. Jake Otanka Obetsebi-Lamptey, brought this proceeding to review the Supreme Court’s earlier judgment delivered on 22 May 2012. Their principal complaint was that the earlier majority decision had made a fundamental error in the interpretation and enforcement of articles 20(5) and (6) of the 1992 Constitution concerning state/public property, thereby occasioning a miscarriage of justice. They initially also alleged discovery of new and important matter or evidence, but abandoned that ground at the hearing. Portion of judgment: “This is an application for a review of the judgment of this Court delivered on 22nd May 2012…”; and paragraph 5 of the supporting affidavit as reproduced in the judgment: “There are exceptional circumstances as fundamental errors were made in the interpretation and enforcement of Article 20(5) & (6)… We have made discovery of new and important matter or evidence…”

DR. DATE-BAH,JSC; This is an application for a review of the judgment of this Court delivered on 22nd May 2012 by a panel of nine judges. Being a review application, the burden on the applicants is to satisfy this Court that there are, in the words of Rule 54(a) of the Supreme Court Rules, 1996 CI 16, in this case “(a) exceptional circumstances which have resulted in miscarriage of justice.” This Court has held time and time again that a review application is not an appeal and should not be argued as if it were. Accordingly, before this Court enters into the full merits of the review application, it should be satisfied that the case falls intoone of the categories that existing case law has held to justify the exercise of the review jurisdiction or into a new category justifying such review, since the cases have also held that the categories justifying review are not closed. I made a similar point in Gihoc Refrigeration & Household Products (No. 1) v Hanna Assi (No. 1) [20...