TSIKATA vs. ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2002]DLSC1274

Date	2002-03-20
Suit No.
Citation No.	[2002]DLSC1274

EDWARD WIREDU CJ JSC

BAMFORD-ADDO JSC

AMPIAH JSC

KPEPGAH JSC

ADJABENG JSC

ACQUAH JSC

ATUGUBA JSC

AKUFFO JSC

ADZOE JSC

PROFESSOR E V O DANKWA (WITH HIM R L S AGBENOTO) FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

HON NANA AKUFO-ADDO ATTORNEY-GENERAL (WITH HIM GLORIA AKUFFO (MS) DEPUTY ATTORNEY-GENERAL OSAFO-SAMPONG DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS AND E A ADDO SOLICITOR-GENERAL) FOR THE DEFENDANT.

[2002]DLSC1274
																																						<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" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">TSIKATA<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">ATTORNEY-GENERAL<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[2001-2002] 2 GLR 1<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">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="right" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:right;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">Date: 20 MARCH
2002<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>PROFESSOR E V O DANKWA (WITH HIM R L S AGBENOTO) FOR THE
PLAINTIFF.<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">

HON NANA AKUFO-ADDO, ATTORNEY-GENERAL (WITH HIM GLORIA AKUFFO
(MS), DEPUTY ATTORNEY-GENERAL; OSAFO-SAMPONG, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
AND E A ADDO, SOLICITOR-GENERAL) FOR THE DEFENDANT. <o:p></o:p>

EDWARD WIREDU CJ, BAMFORD-ADDO, AMPIAH, KPEPGAH, ADJABENG, ACQUAH,
ATUGUBA, AKUFFO AND ADZOE JJSC<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>Bamford-Addo
JSC. The plaintiff has invoked the exclusive original jurisdiction of
the Supreme Court under articles 1(2) and 130(1) of the Constitution, 1992 of
Ghana, which gives the Supreme Court exclusive original jurisdiction in all
matters relating to the enforcement or interpretation of this Constitution.
Article 1 of the Constitution, 1992 provides that:<o:p></o:p>“1. (1) The
Sovereignty of Ghana resides in the people of Ghana in whose name and for whose
welfare the powers of government are to be exercised in the manner and within the
limits laid down in this Constitution. 2. This Constitution shall be the
supreme law of Ghana and any other law found to be inconsistent with any
provision of this Constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be
void.”<o:p></o:p>Article 2 of the Constitution, 1992 has provided how the supreme
law is to be enforced. Accordingly, it states:<o:p></o:p>“2. (1) A
person who alleges that—<o:p></o:p>(a) an
enactment of anything contained in or done, under the authority of that or any
other enactment; or (b) any act or omission of any person; is inconsistent
with, or is in contravention of a provision of this Constitution, may bring an
action in the Supreme Court for a declaration to that effect.”<o:p></o:p>(The emphasis is mine.)<o:p></o:p>Our mandate here is that whenever any person alleges that any act
or omission of another is inconsistent or is in contravention of any part of
the Constitution, 1992 the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to interpret the
particular article and if it is so found, to declare that act null and void. In
this way the Constitution, 1992 is enforced.<o:p></o:p>In this case, the Attorney-General sought to try the plaintiff on
a criminal charge for a criminal offence under section 179A of the Criminal
Code, 1960 (Act 29) at the so-called “Fast Track High Court” which has been set
up by the Chief Justice. The plaintiff therefore issued a writ in this court,
and in the writ he claims that the Fast Track High Court was an
unconstitutional court with no legal mandate to try him in respect of the
offence with which he had been charged. In other words, that the creation of
the “Fast Track High Court” was inconsistent with the Constitution, 1992 and
therefore not a court of competent jurisdiction which can try him. The
defendant on his part claimed that the “Fast Track High Court” was legally and
constitutionally set up and is a division of the ordinary High Court. That it
was set up under article 139(3) of the Constitution, 1992.<o:p></o:p>It is necessary therefore for this court to interpret article
139(3) of the Constitution, 1992 particularly the word “divisions” in that
article to find out whether that article gave the Chief Justice the power to
set up the Fast Track High Court.<o:p></o:p>In the plaintiff’s writ the following declarations were sought,
namely:<o:p></o:p>“(1) A
declaration that there is no ‘Fast Track High Court’ with ju</main>