GH - DONALD ARTHUR VS WEST AFRICA EXAMINATION COUNCIL

On 12th June, 2018, the Applicant in this case originated the instant action for judicial review in the nature of certiorari for the following reliefs against the Respondent: i. A declaration that Applicant is entitled to be heard before any decision relating to the cancellation of his 2017 WASSCE results is taken.

A declaration that the decision of the Ghana Examination Committee of the West African Examinations Council taken against applicant at its 22nd Meeting was unlawful, null and void since it violated article 23 of the 1992 Constitution and a breach of the rules of natural justice.

An order to quash Respondent‟s decision to cancel Applicant‟s 2017 WASSCE results as the same was done in breach of the rules of natural justice.

General damages for wrongful cancellation of Applicant‟s 2017 WASSCE results.

v. Cost including legal fees.

AND for any further order(s) as this Honourable court may deem fit.

A summation of the Applicant‟s grievance, per his supporting affidavit, is as follows: The Applicant states that he registered for the 2017 WASSCE private examinations to better his grades in three (3) subjects, including economics.

That the events that transpired on the day of the economics examination paper are what have grounded the instant action.

According to the Applicant, on the day of the economics examination paper, all the candidates for the examination, including him, were physically searched by officials of the Respondent at the entrance of the examination hall before entry into the hall.

It is the case of the Applicant that he had a wrist watch strapped to his left hand with which he entered the examination hall.

The Applicant further states that in the course of the examination, a lady invigilator inquired from him what he had on his left hand, to which he replied that it was a wrist watch.

The Applicant further states that the said invigilator requested another invigilator to take the watch from him and asked him to write a statement to the effect that he was caught with a digital watch on during the course of the examination.

According to the Applicant, at all material times during the examination, he was not using the watch for any activity.

The Applicant also states that the Respondent never made known to him nor demonstrated to him that the watch could perform other functions apart from telling the time.

The Applicant states further that he initially made a statement in which he included that he was physically searched at