THE REPUBLIC vs. THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE ASOGLI TRADITIONAL COUNCIL, HO, EX-PARTE: CHRISTIAN LETSU AVEVOR & 6 OTHERS AND EMMANUEL AZAMETI & 3 OTHERS [2018]DLSC3455

THE REPUBLIC vs. THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE ASOGLI TRADITIONAL COUNCIL, HO, E... [2018]DLSC3455

Date	2018-05-23
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL: NO. J4/28/2017
Citation No.	[2018]DLSC3455

ANSAH JSC (PRESIDING)

YEBOAH JSC

BAFFOE-BONNIE JSC

APPAU JSC

PWAMANG JSC

HUMPHREY KWADZO MODZAKAH WITH HIM NII BI AYI BONTE FOR THE

DEFENDANTS/APPLICANTS/RESPONDENTS/ APPELLANTS

NELSON MAWUTOR KPORHA FOR THE INTERESTED PARTIES/RESPONDENTS.

[2018]DLSC3455
																																						<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 OF THE ASOGLI
TRADITIONAL COUNCIL, HO, EX-PARTE: CHRISTIAN LETSU AVEVOR &amp; 6 OTHERS&nbsp;&nbsp; AND EMMANUEL AZAMETI &amp; 3 OTHERS<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT, 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">

CIVIL APPEAL: NO. J4/28/2017&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: 23RD MAY, 2018<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>HUMPHREY KWADZO MODZAKAH WITH HIM NII BI AYI BONTE
FOR THE DEFENDANTS/APPLICANTS/RESPONDENTS/ APPELLANTS<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">

NELSON MAWUTOR KPORHA FOR THE INTERESTED PARTIES/RESPONDENTS.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p>ANSAH JSC (PRESIDING), YEBOAH JSC, BAFFOE-BONNIE
JSC, APPAU JSC, PWAMANG JSC <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">

</div>APPAU, JSC:- <o:p></o:p>The
facts that gave rise to this appeal are quite straightforward and not in
dispute whatsoever between the parties. On 29th March 2011, the interested
parties/respondents herein summoned the appellants herein before the Asogli
Traditional Council seeking certain declarations which fell within the
jurisdiction of the Council. A judicial committee was put in place to determine
the matter between the parties. On the 9th of May 2013, the judicial
committee that heard the matter delivered judgment in favour of the interested
parties/respondents. The appellants appealed against the decision of the judicial
committee to the Volta Regional House of Chiefs, Ho but their appeal was
struck-out by the judicial committee of the Regional House as having been filed
out of time. Appellants thereafter, filed a judicial review application before
the High Court, Ho, pursuant to an extension of time granted them by the trial High
Court, praying for an order of certiorari to quash the decision of the judicial
committee of the Asogli Traditional Council on the following grounds:<o:p></o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The Chiefs who attended the meeting of the Asogli
Traditional Council on 22nd January 2012 at which meeting the pool
of eleven (11) chiefs were nominated by the Council from which the members of
the Judicial Committee of the Council that sat on the parties case were
selected or appointed did not have their names registered or entered in the
Chieftaincy bulletin to clothe them with authority to so act.<o:p></o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The meeting at which the pool of chiefs was
selected from which the judicial committee members were&nbsp; appointed, lacked the requisite forum of more
than half the total membership of the Council at the time it purported to
selected the pool of chiefs.<o:p></o:p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The judicial committee exceeded its jurisdiction
when it appointed a Stool Father for the Eho Stool when there was no claim
before the Judicial Committee for the appointment of a Stool Father.<o:p></o:p>In
their submissions before the trial High Court, the appellants did not limit
their arguments to the grounds re-called above. They also canvassed a legal
point that there was no meeting of the Asogli Traditional Council to appoint
the three-member judicial committee that heard their case. The judicial committee
was therefore not appointed by the Asogli Traditional Council in compliance
with the provisions of section 29 (2) of the Chieftaincy Act, [Act 759]. The
trial High Court did not consider this last argument in its judgment but
nevertheless granted the judicial review application and quashed the decision
of the judicial committee of the Asogli Traditional Council. The reason for
granting the application was that the chiefs who constituted the judicial
committee did not have their names gazetted and registered in the Register of
the National House of Chiefs. The judicial committee was therefore not properly
constituted to hear the matter. <o:p></o:p>The
interested parties/respondents appealed against the decision of the trial High
Court to the Court of Appeal on two grounds and succeeded. The two grounds of
appeal were that: 1. The learned trial
judge erred in holding that the members of the judicial committee of the Asogli
Traditional Council which heard and determined the chieftaincy dispute between
the parties did not have their names gazetted and registered in the Register of
the National House of Chiefs and 2.
The learned trial judge erred in relying on exhibits C, D and D1 to determine
the gazetting and registration requirement of the members of the said judicial
committee. The decision of the trial High Court was accordingly set aside
wherein the Court of Appeal proceeded </main>