IN RE WA-NA; REPUBLIC vs. FIJOLI-NA; EX PARTE YAKUBU AND OTHERS [1987]DLCA766

Date	1987-05-14
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1987]DLCA766

ABBAN JA

WUAKU JA

AMUA-SEKYI J.A

W.A.N. ADUMUA-BOSSMAN FOR THE APPELLANTS.

ANTHONY MMIEH (WITH HIM W.A. ATUGUBA) FOR THE RESPONDENTS

[1987]DLCA766
																																						<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" >IN RE WA-NA; REPUBLIC <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>FIJOLI-NA; EX PARTE YAKUBU AND OTHERS <o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1987-88] 1 GLR 180<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
14 MAY 1987<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">

W.A.N. ADUMUA-BOSSMAN FOR THE APPELLANTS. <o:p></o:p>

ANTHONY MMIEH (WITH HIM W.A. ATUGUBA) FOR THE
RESPONDENTS<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">

ABBAN, WUAKU AND AMUA-SEKYI JJ.A<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ABBAN J.A.<o:p></o:p>The
appeal is from the ruling of the High Court, Bolgatanga. The ruling was given
on 6 December 1986. The respondents were the applicants in the High Court and
in the affidavit which accompanied their application, they alleged that the
appellants (nine in number and headed by one Hamidu Fijoli-Na) had held a
meeting at which the ninth appellant one J. N. Momori, was nominated Wa-Na.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
respondents contended that the said meeting was not properly constituted in
that some of the kingmakers of the skin of Wa were not present, not only that,
those kingmakers who were absent at the meeting were not even notified of any
such meeting. It may be observed that the issue as to who are the kingmakers of
the Wa skin has been settled by the judgment of the Supreme Court and they
include the head of Tendambas, the princes of the four gates of the Wa skin,
the Foriko and Yari-Na.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>According
to the respondents, the Tendambas elected one Brimah Mumuni, the second respondent,
as their head, and each of the princes of the four gates also elected its
representative. A letter was written to all the kingmakers inviting them to “a
meeting on 29 August 1985 to elect a successor to the Wa skin.” But the
invitation was not extended to the head of the Tendambas, Brimah Mumuni, and
the accredited representatives of the princes of the four gates and so in the
view of the respondents that meeting was not properly constituted and lacked
jurisdiction to nominate J.N. Momori as a successor to the Wa skin.<o:p></o:p>The
respondents therefore asked the High Court to quash the nomination of the said
J.N. Momori a being null and void and also for an order of quo warranto in the
nature of an injunction to restrain J.N. Momori from acting as Wa-Na.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The appellants
opposed the application. The affidavit in opposition was sworn to, and on
behalf of the appellants, by Sumani Iddi, the seventh appellant; and in
paragraph (3) thereof it was stated as follows:<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
Kingmakers of Wa did on 29 August 1985 select J.N. Momori as Wa-Na. At the
relevant meeting the Busa gate was represented by Asani Iddrisu, the Nakpaha
gate also known as Gulli was represented by Saaka Yakubu, the Sing gate was
represented by Iddi Bupali, all these persons are heads of their respective
gates. The head of the Tendambas, Sumani Monje; the Yari Na, Mahaman Kulandi,
and the Foriko Sumani Iddi (myself) all attended the relevant meeting and took
part in the said selection of J.N. Momori.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
appellants thus denied the assertion that the meeting was irregularly convened
or constituted and contended that those who met on the said date were, in fact,
the kingmakers of the Wa skin.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In a
situation like this, before the High Court could grant or refuse the reliefs
asked for it must necessarily go into the question whether Brimah Mumuni or
Sumani Monje was one of the kingmakers of the Wa skin; and for the court to
make a pronouncement one way or the other on that issue, it had to decide a
subsidiary question as to which one of them was the head of the Tendambas since
the accredited head of the Tendambas would automatically become one of the
kingmakers according to custom. It was only after the court had made a finding
as to which of the two persons was a kingmaker that the court would be in a
position to decide whether or not the meeting was properly constituted.<o:p></o:p</main>