JUDGMENT OF HAYFRON-BENJAMIN J.
This is an application for an interim injunction to restrain the first defendant from performing the functions and from enjoying the privileges of the high office of Chief Imam of Greater Accra. The plaintiffs' claim in the main suit is for a declaration that the [p.258] election and installation of the first defendant on 4 June 1971 as the Chief Imam of the Greater Accra is contrary to the religious customs and practices of the Muslim Community of Greater Accra and therefore invalid. The plaintiffs further claim an order in the nature of a perpetual injunction to restrain the first defendant from performing the functions of the Chief Imam of Greater Accra.
The application for interim injunction is grounded on (a) the likelihood of the breach of the peace and (b) the desire to keep the unity and integrity of the Muslim Church. The application is strongly resisted on the ground that the plaintiffs have no right to decide who should be chosen as Chief Imam for the Central Mosque. This court must guard itself from making a ruling which might well dispose of the main case on its merits. I shall therefore confine my consideration of the application to points not affecting the merits. The first is this: the assertion by the defendants that the first defendant has been leading the congregation in prayer and has been acting as Chief Imam since 1965 in place of his aged father is not disputed. An interim injunction is meant to preserve the status quo ante. The status quo demands that the first defendant should continue to lead the congregation in prayer as he has done since 1965. What the plaintiffs are asking, i.e. that the first defendant should be restrained from performing the duties of Chief Imam, would prevent him from even acting on behalf of his father whom the plaintiffs recognise as the Imam. That would alter the position as it has subsisted since 1965.
The second point is that the plaintiffs on their own showing were well aware that the third defendant was making preparations to instal the first defendant as Chief Imam . Instead of applying to the court for the protection of the rights they claim, they chose to approach the Chief Executive of Greater Accra to use his good offices to stop the proposed installation. Of course the Chief Executive cannot give orders having the force of law; in such matters all that he could do and in fact did was to request the defendants (according to the amended statement of claim) to s
