TUFFUOR vs. ATTORNEY-GENERAL [1980]DLSC1122

Date	1980-09-23
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1980]DLSC1122

SOWAH JSC

CHARLES CRABBE J.S.C

LASSEY JA

FRANCOIS J.A.

AGYEPONG J.

NANA AKUFO-ADDO (WITH HIM DR. PREMPEH TSATSU TSIKATA J. A. GLOVER AND MRS. REINDORF) FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

JOE REINDORF ATTORNEY-GENERAL (WITH HIM DJABATEY DEPUTY ATTORNEY-GENERAL C. H. A. TETTEH

SOLICITOR-GENERAL I. ODOI AND MRS. CAMPBELL PRINCIPAL STATE ATTORNEYS) FOR THE DEFENDANT.

[1980]DLSC1122
																																						<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" >TUFFUOR <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>ATTORNEY-GENERAL<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME ACCRA] <o:p></o:p>[1978] GLR 637<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DATE:
23 SEPTEMBER 1980<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>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">

NANA AKUFO-ADDO (WITH HIM DR. PREMPEH, TSATSU
TSIKATA, J. A. GLOVER AND MRS. REINDORF) FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p>

JOE REINDORF, ATTORNEY-GENERAL (WITH HIM DJABATEY,
DEPUTY ATTORNEY-GENERAL, C. H. A. TETTEH,<o:p></o:p>

SOLICITOR-GENERAL, I. ODOI AND MRS. CAMPBELL,
PRINCIPAL STATE ATTORNEYS) 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 1.0pt 0in">

SOWAH AND CHARLES CRABBE JJ.S.C., LASSEY<o:p></o:p>

AND FRANCOIS JJ.A. AND AGYEPONG J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF SOWAH J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>Sowah
J.S.C. delivered the judgment of the court. The plaintiff is seeking a
declaration from this court that:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>“(a) on
the coming into force of the Constitution of the Third Republic on 24 September
1979, Fred Kwasi Apaloo was deemed to have been appointed Chief Justice of the
Republic and as such became president and member of the Supreme Court; <o:p></o:p>(b) the
purported nomination by the President of the Republic of Fred Kwasi Apaloo for
approval by Parliament of his appointment as Chief Justice of the Republic and
member of the Supreme Court and his purported vetting and rejection by
Parliament as such on 16 August 1980 were each acts effected in contravention
of the Constitution and laws of the Republic and were therefore all null and
void and of no effect; <o:p></o:p>(c) Fred
Kwasi Apaloo remains Chief Justice of the Republic and, thereby, president of
the Supreme Court.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
Attorney-General, as solicitor for the defendants stated, inter alia, in his
statement of defence that:<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"><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">“in
nominating Fred Kwasi Apaloo as Chief Justice, the President was acting in
fulfilment of the mandatory requirements of article 127 (1) of the
Constitution, 1979, and in the exercise of powers conferred on him by the same
clause of the Constitution, while Parliament, in rejecting the said nomination,
was exercising powers conferred upon it by the said clause (1) of article 127.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>At the
hearing, the Attorney-General sought leave to raise preliminary objections:
firstly as to the jurisdiction of this court; secondly, as to the capacity of
the plaintiff and thirdly as to the competency of the Speaker as the first
defendant. Arguing on the issue of jurisdiction the Attorney-General, submitted
that this court as presently constituted was the Court of Appeal exercising, by
virtue of the provisions of section 3 of Part III of the First Schedule to the
Constitution, the powers conferred upon the Supreme Court under articles 51,
117, and 118. This meant that the powers of the present court were limited to
those articles and it had no jurisdiction to deal with any issue falling under,
or referable to, article 2. As such if there was any portion of the plaintiff’s
claim which was referable to article 2 that portion was bad in law. The only
court that could make a declaration under article 2 of the Constitution was the
Supreme Court properly so called and properly so constituted.<o:p></o:p>