THE REPUBLIC vs. ASANTEHENE NANA OSEI TUTU II AND THE ASANTEMAN COUNCIL EX-PARTE: ABUSUAPANIN OWUSU SEKYERE AFRIYIE AND ASINIEHENE NANA KWAME YAMOAH II [2005]DLCA6610

THE REPUBLIC vs. ASANTEHENE NANA OSEI TUTU II AND THE ASANTEMAN COUNCIL EX-PART... [2005]DLCA6610

Date	2005-03-15
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. H3/141/2005
Citation No.	[2005]DLCA6610

OWUSU J.A. (PRESIDING)

TWENEBOA-KODUA J.A.

ANIM J.A

PAAPA DADSON FOR 1ST RESPONDENT

ADUMUA BOSSMAN FOR APPLICANTS CHARLES BENTUM HOLDING HIS BRIEF] KWASI AFRIFA FOR 2ND RESPONDENT

DWAMENAAKENTEN FOR 1ST INTERESTED PARTY

[2005]DLCA6610
																																						<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" >THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ASANTEHENE
NANA OSEI TUTU II AND THE ASANTEMAN COUNCIL<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>EX-PARTE:
ABUSUAPANIN OWUSU SEKYERE AFRIYIE AND ASINIEHENE NANA KWAME YAMOAH II<o:p></o:p>(APPLICANTS/APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<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="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">CIVIL
APPEAL NO. H3/141/2005&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; DATE: 15TH
MARCH, 2005<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:
<o:p></o:p>PAAPA DADSON FOR 1ST RESPONDENT <o:p></o:p>ADUMUA BOSSMAN FOR APPLICANTS CHARLES
BENTUM HOLDING HIS BRIEF] <o:p></o:p>KWASI AFRIFA FOR 2ND RESPONDENT <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" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">DWAMENAAKENTEN FOR 1ST
INTERESTED PARTY <o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
115%;mso-outline-level:1;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">OWUSU J.A. (PRESIDING)
TWENEBOA-KODUA J.A. AND ANIM J.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

</div>OWUSU J.A. <o:p></o:p>At
the hearing of an application for interlocutory injunction pending appeal,
Counsel for the Respondents raised a preliminary objection to the competency of
the application before the Court. <o:p></o:p>The
applicants are praying for an Order to restrain the Respondents and the
Interested Parties Abusuapayin Isaac Kofi Boateng (Head of the Tiwaa branch of
the Agona stool family) and Dr. Akwasi Berko and any of them, their servants,
agents, privies who so ever or otherwise howsoever from taking any step
whatsoever in or toward the implementation of the decision dated 5th day of
February, 2004 in the Agona (Ashanti) Chieftaincy Dispute pending the hearing
and determination of the appeal filed on the day of 2004 against the ruling of
Justice W. Kpentey dated the 12th day of October 2004. <o:p></o:p>In
the body of the motion, the day on which the said appeal was filed had not been
stated. The notice of appeal however indicates that the appeal was filed on
18th October 2004. <o:p></o:p>The
Applicants had in the High Court, Kumasi, unsuccessfully sought for "A
joint and several Order of Mandamus upon the Respondents requiring them or
either of them to make available forthwith to the applicants or either of them
a certified true copy of the proceedings and decision of the 2nd respondent in
the Agona-Ashanti Chieftaincy (succession) Dispute heard and determined by that
council on 5 February and; <o:p></o:p>2.
An order of certiorari upon the 2nd Respondent to bring up to this Honourable
Court to be quashed the decision dated 5th February 2004 in the said dispute".
<o:p></o:p>The
application was heard on its merits and dismissed on 12th October 2004 and
reasons for the dismissal were assigned by His Lordship Kpentey J. on 29th
October 2004. <o:p></o:p>Following
the dismissal of the application, the Applicants filed another Motion copy of
which was not exhibited in this present application but this is the ruling of
the court, below in respect of that application delivered on 10th December,
2004. <o:p></o:p>“-------------------------------
I think this application is in the nature of stay of execution but it has been
repackaged and given a different name, looked at from that angle, it is my
opinion that there is nothing executable, in the decision dated 12th October,
2004 by the known process of execution and which is therefore capable of being
stayed. <o:p></o:p>On
the other hand considering the application as it is packaged i.e. application
for interlocutory injunction, I am of the opinion that, this court has no
jurisdiction to make an order restraining the respondents or anybody from being
sworn in as a chief or from taking part in any oath swearing ceremony in so far
as it is a matter affecting Chieftaincy." <o:p></o:p>The
application, for the above stated reasons, was dismissed. <o:</main>