Akuffo JSC.
The plaintiff brought this action to invoke the original jurisdiction of this court under article 2(1) and (2) of the Constitution, 1992 claiming seven reliefs which may be summed up as follows: “(1) a declaration that on a true and proper interpretation of section 8(1) and (7) of the transitional
provisions of the Constitution, 1992 before the coming into force of the Constitution, 1992 the plaintiff, who was transferred from the Council for Law Reporting to the General Legal Council on his appointment as the Director of Legal Education, had the accrued right, by the combined effect of section 8(1)(c) of the Interpretation Act, 1960 (CA 4), and sections 5 and 7 of the Legal Service Law, 1993 (PNDCL 320), to retire at the age of 65;
(2) a declaration that the plaintiff, who was at the time of the coming into force of the Constitution, 1992 the Director of Legal Education/Director of the Ghana School of Law (hereinafter referred to as the Director of Legal Education), is entitled to retire at the age of 65 and the provisions of article 199(1) of the Constitution, 1992 are not applicable to him, and therefore, so long as his appointment to the said position subsists, the first defendant cannot purport to appoint any other person to that position;
(3) consequently, the letter dated 2 January 2003, appointing the second defendant as the substantive Director of Legal Education impugns the plaintiff’s said accrued rights and is, therefore, a nullity;
(4) a declaration that the third defendant’s continuation in office as Registrar of the Ghana School of Law and Secretary of the Board of Legal Education (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Registrar’) after attaining the age of 65 years on 4 February 2003, is inconsistent with and in contravention of article 199(1) and (4) of the Constitution, 1992 as amended by the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana (Amendment) Act, 1996 (Act 527), and therefore unconstitutional and unlawful; and
(5) order of perpetual injunction restraining:
(a) the first defendant from holding out the second
[p.743] of [2003-2005] 1 GLR 738
defendant as the Director of Legal Education;
(b) the second defendant from holding himself out as the Director of Legal Education; (c) the first defendant from holding out the third defendant as the registrar; and (d) the third defendant from holding himself out as the registrar.”
The plaintiff’s case
In support of these claims, counsel for the plaintiff filed a rather prolix stat
