ATTITSOGBE vs. HARLLEY [1971]DLHC2205

Date	1971-11-19
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1971]DLHC2205

HAYFRON-BENJAMIN J.

U. V. CAMPBELL FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

K. A. SEKYI PRINCIPAL STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE DEFENDANT.

[1971]DLHC2205
																																						<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" >ATTITSOGBE <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>HARLLEY<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1972] 1 GLR 194<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

DATE:
19 NOVEMBER 1971.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

U. V. CAMPBELL FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p>

K. A. SEKYI, PRINCIPAL STATE ATTORNEY, FOR THE
DEFENDANT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

HAYFRON-BENJAMIN J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF HAYFRON BENJAMIN J.<o:p></o:p>This
libel action arises out of a publication in a daily newspaper circulating in
Ghana. The publication was at the instance of the defendant, then
Inspector-General of Police and the Vice-Chairman of the National Liberation
Council. The defendant later became a member of the Presidential Commission. It
is alleged that the publication is defamatory of the plaintiff and further that
the defendant in causing it to be published was actuated by express malice.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Both the
plaintiff and the defendant have submitted that the defendant as a member of
the National Liberation Council and the Presidential Commission occupied in law
the position of the President. From these premises the plaintiff contends that
he was therefore immune from legal process and that is why the action was not
brought earlier. The plaintiff pleads in paragraph (2) of his reply:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“that
since defendant was Vice-Chairman of the National Liberation Council and
subsequently Vice-Chairman of the Presidential Commission and therefore
unattainable by judicial process before 7 August 1969, the earliest date at
which the plaintiff could have brought the action was 8 August 1969 when the
defendant ceased to be so unattainable. And the plaintiff says that by virtue
of article 36 (8) of the Constitution, 1969, this action is not
statute-barred.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Article
36 (8) of the Constitution provides that: [His lordship here read the
provisions as set out in the headnote and continued:]<o:p></o:p>I do not
think any lengthy analysis is required to demonstrate the unsoundness of this submission.
The National Liberation Council exercised the executive authority of the state,
and in that sense performed the duties of the President. In all enactments,
references to the President were to be read as references to the National
Liberation Council. No individual member of the National Liberation Council was
the President neither was any individual member of the Presidential Commission.
It is argued that the Chairman or the Vice-Chairman of the National Liberation
Council was authorised to sign decrees, etc. and when so signed was conclusive evidence
that it was made by the National Liberation Council. The fact that a managing
director can sign a document binding on a limited liability company does not
make the managing director the company. I am of the view that the defendant
never was President and is not now the President of Ghana, and that the
provisions of article 36 (8) of the Constitution do not apply.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
defendant’s contention that the action is barred by reason of section 2 (1) of
the Public Officers Act, 1962 (Act 114), has to be considered. In paragraph (9)
of the statement of defence the defendant pleads:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“The
defendant will contend that this action is barred by section 2 (1) of the
Public Officers Act, 1962 (Act 114), by reason of the fact that being an action
in respect of an act done by a public officer in the execution of his public
duty, it was not commenced within three months of the publication complained
of.”<o:p></o:p>