[2024]DLSC17873 • December 11, 2024 • Supreme Court •
THE REPUBLIC vs. HIGH COURT (CRIMINAL DIVISION 3) ACCRA EX PARTE: OLIVER MAWUSE BARKER VORMAWOR
Oliver Mawuse Barker Vormawor, charged with Treason Felony under section 182b of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29), challenged the constitutionality of his trial mode and the consistency of section 182 with Article 33 of the 1992 Constitution. He alleged that the High Court erred by interpreting Article 33 instead of referring the constitutional question to the Supreme Court, and contended that the charges and trial procedure violated constitutional provisions.
read moreMotion invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under article 132 for an order of certiorari to issue up to the High Court (Criminal Division 3) to quash the decision of the High Court which purported to interpret Article 3(3) instead of a referral to the Supreme Court for interpretation. Applicant alleges that the charges preferred against him are inconsistent with Article 3(3), Article 19(11) and 21 (1) (a) & (b). The question before the High Court was whether Section 182 of Act 29 is inconsistent with Article 3(3). It became apparent that the Applicant and the State had put rival meanings on Article 3(3). While the Applicant holds the view that Article 3(3) prohibits both violent means and unlawful means to overthrow the state, the State believes it prohibits only violent means used. Unless the Court interprets it otherwise, that the Applicant contends conduct which is either violent or unlawful is prohibited. That section 182 of Act 29 which also prohibits t...