THE REPUBLIC vs. THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE AJUMAKO TRADITIONAL COUNCIL (RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS) EX PARTE: NANA YAMOAH IV , EBUSUAPANYIN KOBINA EBO AND 5 OTHERS [2017]DLCA4683

THE REPUBLIC vs. THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE AJUMAKO TRADITIONAL COUNCIL (RESPONDENTS... [2017]DLCA4683

Date	2017-01-30
Suit No.	SUIT NO. H1/43/2016
Citation No.	[2017]DLCA4683

HONYENUGA J.A (PRESIDING)

GYAN J.A

SUURBAAREH J.A

P. K. O. MENSAH ESQ FOR THE APPLICANT/APPELLANT

HENRY K. AMPORFUL ESQ FOR THE INTERESTED PARTIES/RESPONDENTS

[2017]DLCA4683
																																						<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>THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE AJUMAKO TRADITIONAL COUNCIL<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>EX
PARTE: NANA YAMOAH IV (APPLICANT/APPELLANT),
EBUSUAPANYIN KOBINA EBO AND 5 OTHERS (INTERESTED PARTIES/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, CAPE COAST]<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">

SUIT NO. H1/43/2016&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE:
30/01/2017<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>P. K. O. MENSAH, ESQ, FOR THE APPLICANT/APPELLANT<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">

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HONYENUGA
J.A (PRESIDING), GYAN J.A, SUURBAAREH J.A<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">

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

</div>SAEED K. GYAN, J.A<o:p></o:p>I
believe it is not for nothing that the 1992 constitution of Ghana as well as
previous other constitutions of Ghana have sought to protect the Institution of
Chieftaincy in the Country. A whole Chapter (22) of the current constitution
has been devoted to chieftaincy.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
constitution provides in Article 270 thereof as follows:<o:p></o:p>“270.
(1) The institution of chieftaincy, together with its&nbsp;&nbsp; traditional Councils as established by
customary law and usage, is hereby guaranteed.<o:p></o:p>(2)
Parliament shall have no power to enact any law which –<o:p></o:p>a) confers on any person or authority
the right to accord &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; or withdraw
recognition to or from a chief for any purpose whatsoever, or <o:p></o:p>b) in any way detracts or derogates
from the honour and dignity of the institution of chieftaincy”<o:p></o:p>Indeed,
Article 290 (1) (p) of the 1992 constitution makes Article 270 of the
constitution, which deals with the institution of chieftaincy, an entrenched
part of the constitution. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
chief or chieftaincy in Ghana can, therefore, properly be conceived of or
described as the sacred cow of our customary and traditional heritage, which
should not be trifled with. That being so, the honour and dignity of the chief
as well as chieftaincy, as a hallowed institution, need to be strenuously
safeguarded by all, especially so by the chiefs themselves, together with all
the agencies, institutions and structures established, either by or under
custom, tradition or statute.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It
is against this backdrop that this case and all other cases touching on chieftaincy
ought to be approached with delicacy and sensitivity.<o:p></o:p>It
is equally important to draw attention to the pregnant words of Akamba, JSC
contained in the lead judgment of the Supreme Court case of : F. K. A. Company Ltd. and Anor v. Ayikai
Akramah II and &amp;ors [2016] 101 GMJ 186. The learned and didactic
Akamba, JSC delivered himself at page 212 of the report thus:<o:p></o:p>“It is important to stress that the
adjudication process thrives&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; upon
law which defines its scope of operation …………..<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Any initiative within the context of the
adjudication process&nbsp;&nbsp; must be guided by
the appropriate, relevant provision, be it substantive law or procedural law.
As Courts, if we fail to enforce compliance with the rules of Court, we would
by that lapse be enforcing the failure of the adjudication process which we
have sworn by our judicial oaths to uphold”. <o:p></o:p>