2024
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case concerns a challenge to recommendations made by the Professor Ntiamoa-Baidu Committee, appointed under Article 71 of the Ghana Constitution, regarding emoluments for spouses of the President and Vice-President. The Supreme Court held that while its original jurisdiction was properly invoked, the plaintiffs had no cause of action against the Committee itself. The Court clarified that the Committee's recommendations are not binding or justiciable until accepted and implemented by Parliament or the President. It emphasized that the Committee lacks the power to create new categories of Article 71 office holders or extend benefits to individuals not specified in the Constitution. The Court also reaffirmed principles regarding the interpretation and enforcement of constitutional provisions, particularly in relation to the powers and limitations of bodies established under the Constitution.
PROF. MENSA-BONSU JSC:
This is an action by the three plaintiffs to challenge the capacity of the
Professor Ntiamoa-Baidu Committee appointed by the President under Article
71, to make recommendations on the emoluments of listed public officials
under article 71, and deemed by the plaintiffs to be in contravention of
Articles 71(1) and Article 2(2) of the Ghana Constitution,1992.
FACTS AND BACKGROUND:
As provided under article 71(1) of the Constitution, the President of the
Republic is enjoined to set up a Committee to make recommendations in
respect of the emoluments and other privileges of Article 71 holders and to
examine any other relevant matters which the Committee considered
appropriate to its work. The Committee compiled a report dated June 2020,
and titled “Report of the Presidential Committee on Emoluments for Article
71 Office Holders January 2017-December 2020. ” The Report was presented
to Parliament and the Presidency in 2020. On 6th January, 2021 Parliament
approved the recommendations contained in the Report.
In the Report, the Committee stated its intention to make proposals to
formalize a practice of paying allowances to spouses of the President and
Vice-President. The Committee therefore made recommendations to cover
spouses of sitting and former Presidents as part of privileges extended to the
President and Vice President.
The plaintiffs contend that it is not open to the committee to make
recommendations on any matter it so chooses and that such
recommendation would be ultra vires the committee. Therefore, the plaintiffs
are by this writ invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under
Articles 2(1)(a) and Articles 130(1)(a) of the Ghana Constitution,1992
seeking the following declarations:
“1. That upon a true and proper interpretation of
Article 71(1) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, the
Prof. Ntiamoah -Baidu Committee appointed by the
President of Ghana under Article 71(1), only had
jurisdiction to make recommendations in respect of
salaries, allowances payable and privileges of Article
71 Office holders under the 1992 Constitution.
2. That upon a true and proper interpretation of the
Article 71(1)of the 1992 Constitution ,the Prof
Ntiamoah-Baidu Committee had no jurisdiction,
mandate or authority to make any recommendations
in respect of salaries, allowances payable, facilities
and privileges of persons other than persons
specified under Article 71 of the 1992 Constitution.
3