REPUBLIC vs. VOLTA REGION CHIEFTAINCY COMMITTEE & ANOTHER; EX PARTE ASOR II [1972]DLHC2418

Date	1972-12-21
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1972]DLHC2418

FRANCOIS J.

E. D. KOM FOR THE APPLICANT

DJABATEY FOR THE FIRST RESPONDENT (COMMITTEE)

E.C. DJAMSON FOR THE SECOND RESPONDENT.

[1972]DLHC2418
																																						<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" >REPUBLIC <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>VOLTA REGION CHIEFTAINCY COMMITTEE &amp; ANOTHER; EX PARTE ASOR II <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, HO]<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 273<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:
21 DECEMBER 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">

E. D. KOM FOR THE APPLICANT<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">

FRANCOIS J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF FRANCOIS J.<o:p></o:p>In these
proceedings, counsel moves on behalf of the applicant, Togbe Afede Asor, for
the prerogative order of prohibition “to stop the Volta Region Chieftaincy
Committee inquiring into whether the paramount stool of Ho Traditional Area
belongs to or should be occupied by a citizen of either Dome or Bankoe.” The
circumstances which gave rise to this application are as follows: A committee
of inquiry was appointed to inquire into and submit recommendations to the
government on the qualification of membership of the Volta Regional House of
Chiefs. Six terms of reference were set out in the instrument establishing the
said committee.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It
appears that during the course of the inquiry, questions relating to the
applicant in respect of his capacity as a chief of Ho, and in some cases
challenging his status, were raised. Objections have consequently been taken to
the evidence so received as breach of the committee’s jurisdictional powers.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In
dealing with this matter, I am adopting a procedure of convenience in setting
out in separate paragraphs the various issues that require determination, but
before I do so, I shall set out the committee’s terms of reference. They are:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</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">“1. To
find out who are according to customary law, the Paramount Chiefs in the Volta
Region. 2. To inquire whether all such Paramount Chiefs should be members of
the Volta Regional House of Chiefs and whether they are sufficient to
constitute the House. 3. If they are not sufficient for the said purpose, to
determine whether any and how many Divisional Chiefs should be added to their
number for the above mentioned purpose. 4. To make recommendations to the
Government as to the mode of selection or election of the Divisional Chiefs to
be added to the Paramount Chiefs under paragraph 3 above.<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">For the
purposes of paragraph 4 above the Committee should have regard to the communal
groupings and representation, the traditions of the people in the area, their
languages and dialects and their traditional allegiance as well as any other
matters which in the opinion of the Committee should be taken into account for
the purpose of determining the composition of the Volta Regional House of
Chiefs. 6. For the purpose of the discharge of their functions under the
foregoing paragraphs, the Committee shall have regard to the existing
composition of the Volta Regional House of Chiefs under the Chieftaincy Act,
1961 (Act 81) together with the N.L.C. Decrees which affected the status of
chiefs in the Volta Region such as the Chieftaincy (Amendment) Decree 1966,
(N.L.C.D 112) and also to the proposals for the composition of the Volta
Regional House of Chiefs submitted by the Volta Regional Chief Executive.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>To begin
then with the first issue:<o:p></o:p>(1) Does
prohibition lie in respe</main>