CHIEF TSOKOSI AND OTHERS vs. ALHAJI ABBAS AND OTHERS [1971]DLHC10256

Date	1971-07-21
Suit No.	1 G L R 257 – 259
Citation No.	[1971]DLHC10256

HAYFRON-BENJAMIN J.

ATTA CAESAR FOR E.N. MOORE FOR THE APPLICANTS.

KWAW SWANZY FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1971]DLHC10256
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" >CHIEF TSOKOSI
AND OTHERS<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ALHAJI ABBAS AND OTHERS<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>ATTA CAESAR FOR E.N. MOORE FOR THE
APPLICANTS.<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

KWAW SWANZY FOR THE
RESPONDENTS.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

</div>&nbsp;<div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;HAYFRON-BENJAMIN
J.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;This is an application for an interim
injunction to restrain the first defendant from performing the functions and
from enjoying the privileges of the high office of Chief Imam of Greater
Accra.&nbsp; The plaintiffs' claim in the main
suit is for a declaration that the &nbsp;election and installation of the first
defendant on 4 June&nbsp; 1971 as the Chief
Imam of the Greater Accra is contrary to the religious customs and practices of
the Muslim Community of Greater Accra and therefore invalid.&nbsp; The plaintiffs further claim an order in the
nature of a perpetual injunction to restrain the first defendant from performing
the functions of the Chief Imam of Greater Accra.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The application for interim injunction is
grounded on (a) the likelihood of the breach of the peace and (b) the desire to
keep the unity and integrity of the Muslim Church. The application is strongly
resisted on the ground that the plaintiffs have no right to decide who should
be chosen as Chief Imam for the Central Mosque. This court must guard itself
from making a ruling which might well dispose of the main case on its
merits.&nbsp; I shall therefore confine my
consideration of the application to points not affecting the merits. The first
is this: the assertion by the defendants that the first defendant has been
leading the congregation in prayer and has been acting as Chief Imam since 1965
in place of his aged father is not disputed.&nbsp;
An interim injunction is meant to preserve the status quo ante.&nbsp; The status quo demands that the first
defendant should continue to lead the congregation in prayer as he has done
since 1965.&nbsp; What the plaintiffs are
asking, i.e. that the first defendant should be restrained from performing the
duties of Chief Imam, would prevent him from even acting on behalf of his
father whom the plaintiffs recognise as the Imam.&nbsp; That would alter the position as it has
subsisted since 1965.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The second point is that the plaintiffs on
their own showing were well aware that the third defendant was making
preparations to instal the first defendant as Chief Imam .&nbsp; Instead of applying to the court for the
protection of the rights they claim, they chose to approach the Chief Executive
of Greater Accra to use his good offices to stop the proposed installation. Of
course the Chief Executive cannot give orders having the force of law; in such
matters all that he could do and in fact did was to request the defendants
(according to the amended statement of claim) to stay their hands.&nbsp; The said requests were ignored and the third
defendant nominated the first defendant as Chief Imam and the first defendant
was duly installed.&nbsp; It is after this
installation that the plaintiffs apply to the court to restrain the first
defendant from performing his duties.&nbsp; I
would have shown sympathy for this application if the plaintiffs had applied to
the court timeously to restrain the third defendant and others from installing
the first defendant as Chief Imam pending the determination of the question
whether such election was proper in view of the fact that the person who the
plaintiffs claim to be the Chief Imam is still living.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The third point I shall mention is whether
this application being in the nature of an application to protect the rights of
Muslims, i.e. public rights, should not be at least on notice to the
Attorney-General.&nbsp; In England such an
application would have been a relator&nbsp;
action and the Attorney-General would have been a&nbsp; party.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;In the circumstances I refuse the application
for interim injunction and dismiss it.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Costs for the defendants assessed at N¢50.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;DECISION<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Application for interim injunction refused.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;</main>