THE REPUBLIC vs. HIGH COURT (COMM. DIV.) ACCRA EX PARTE; ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OTHERS [2013]DLSC2762

THE REPUBLIC vs. HIGH COURT (COMM. DIV.) ACCRA EX PARTE; ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OT... [2013]DLSC2762

Date	2013-06-20
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J5/10/2013
Citation No.	[2013]DLSC2762

DR. DATE-BAH JSC (PRESIDING)

DOTSE JSC

YEBOAH JSC

GBADEGBE JSC

AKAMBA JSC

MRS. SYLVIA ADUSU (PSA) AKUA GYAMFUA BOAKYE-AKYEAMPONG (ASA)

LED BY THE HONOURABLE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THE SOLICITOR

GENERAL MRS. AMMA GAISE FOR THE APPLICANT .

ACE AKOMAH WITH HIM KOW ESSUMAN FOR THE 1ST INTERESTED PARTY.

KIZITO BEYUO FOR THE 2ND INTERESTED PARTY.

[2013]DLSC2762
																																						<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>HIGH COURT
(COMM. DIV.) ACCRA<o:p></o:p>EX PARTE;
ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OTHERS<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;[SUPREME COURT,ACCRA]&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; <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">

CIVIL APPEAL NO. J5/10/2013&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE:
20TH JUNE, 2013<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>MRS.
SYLVIA ADUSU (PSA) , AKUA GYAMFUA BOAKYE-AKYEAMPONG (ASA) LED BY THE HONOURABLE
ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THE SOLICITOR GENERAL , MRS. AMMA GAISE&nbsp; FOR THE&nbsp;
APPLICANT .<o:p></o:p>ACE
AKOMAH WITH HIM KOW ESSUMAN FOR THE 1ST INTERESTED PARTY.<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">

DR. DATE-BAH JSC (PRESIDING), DOTSE JSC, YEBOAH
JSC, GBADEGBE JSC, AKAMBA JSC<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">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:150%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT
<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>DR. DATE- BAH JSC:<o:p></o:p>Introductory Analysis of the Relationship
between International Law and Ghanaian Municipal Law.<o:p></o:p>This case raises important
issues on the nature of the relationship between international law and
municipal law in Ghana.&nbsp; The main purpose
of the learned Attorney-General in bringing this application for certiorari and prohibition would seem to
be to enable the Republic to comply with the orders of the International
Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (hereafter referred to as the “Tribunal”),
established under the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention.&nbsp; This circumstance raises the question, quite
apart from the other legal issues which arise in this case, whether this court
or any other court of Ghana is obliged to enforce the orders of the Tribunal.<o:p></o:p>Before entering
into the full details of the facts of this case, it would thus be worth our
while to examine this question of the relationship between international law
and municipal law in Ghana.&nbsp; Ghanaian law
on this basic question is no different from the usual position of Commonwealth
common law jurisdictions.&nbsp; It is that
customary international law is part of Ghanaian law; incorporated by the weight
of common law case law (for instance, Triquet
v Bath (1764) 3 Burr. 1478 (Court of King’s Bench) and per Lord Denning in Trendtex
Trading Corporation v Central Bank of Nigeria [1977] QB 529 (Court of
Appeal)).&nbsp; In Chung Chi Cheung v The King [1939] AC 160, the Judicial Committee
of the Privy Council, speaking through Lord Atkin, stated this common law
position as follows (at p. 168):&nbsp; “The
courts acknowledge the existence of a body of rules which nations accept among
themselves.&nbsp; On any judicial issue they
seek to ascertain what the relevant rule is, and, having found it, they will
treat it as incorporated into the domestic law, so far as it is not
inconsistent with rules enacted by statutes or finally declared by their tribunals.”&nbsp;&nbsp; However, treaties, even when the particular
treaty has been ratified by Parliament, do not alter municipal law until they
are incorporated into Ghanaian law by appropriate legislation.<o:p></o:p>This position of
the law is usually referred to as reflecting the “dualist” school of thought,
as distinct from the monist approach followed by some other States.&nbsp; Under a dualist approach, orders of the
Tribunal cannot be binding on Ghanaian courts, in the absence of legislation
making the orders binding on Ghanaian courts.&nbsp;
In any case, the orders of the Tribunal given subsequent to the orders
and ruling of the High Court cannot be a valid basis for the grant of certiorari, according to the authorities
governing the grant of that remedy in this jurisdiction.<o:p></o:p>It is trite knowledge
that certiorari is granted by this
court in respect of fundamental errors of law patent on the face of the record of a superior court or for a
wrong assumption of jurisdiction.&nbsp; (See,
for instance, the Republic v
High Court Accra, Ex Parte CHRAJ [2003-2004] SCGLR 1 and Republic v Court of
Appeal, Ex Parte Tsatsu Tsikata [2005-2006] SCGLR 612