ERIC FROKU TETTEH & ORS VS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL & ANOR
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP, JUSTICE NICHOLAS M. C. ABODAKPI (J)
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
- Constitutional Law
- Civil Procedure
- Education Law
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case involves a judicial review application where the plaintiffs challenged the National Teaching Council's decision to implement National Teachers' Standard Guidelines and Licensure Examination. The plaintiffs argued that the decision was illegal, discriminatory, and lacked legislative authority. The court dismissed the application, holding that the plaintiffs failed to prove illegality, irrationality, or procedural impropriety in the respondents' actions. The court also clarified the requirements for judicial review, indicating that the N.T.C. did not need a legislative instrument to implement the licensure examination policy.
1. BACKGROUND In this application for judicial review, applicants are asking for an order to quash the decision of the National Teaching Council on the implementation of its supposed National Teachers’ Standard for Ghana Guidelines and the Guidelines and Procedure for a Licensure Examination for New Teachers.
The affidavit in support has been deposed to by Elikplim Agbemava, Counsel for applicants.
There are Exhibits annexed, namely: a) EXHIBIT “EFT 1” GES, Policy Frame Work Document.
b) EXHIBIT “EFT 2” National Teachers’ Standard Guidelines.
c) EXHIBIT ‘EFT 3’ A letter authored by National Teaching Council.
The application has been filed on 10-09-2018. And on 09-11-2018, the statement of case in support of the application was filed.
On the other hand, in the affidavit filed on 05-11-2018, the opposition to the application could be found.
And on 04-01-2019, Respondent also filed a statement of case.
In Order 55 Rule 6(2) of the High Court Civil Procedure Rule 2004, C. I. 47 the Applicants should have filed their statement of case fourteen (14) days after filing the application.
The legal consequence for failure to comply with the rule cited supra was not activated.
In the meantime a motion for an order of injunction and the propriety of making the National Teachers’ Council, a second respondent, had to be resolved.
Thus, the application was heard after the National Teachers’ Council had been struck out as a party.
And the various processes filed on both sides were regularized by the Court presently constituted, with Applicants and the Attorney General as the parties.
However, it is worth noting that the motion paper was silent on which of the Writs or exact order of Judicial Review Applicants are seeking.
The title of the application also has not been made in conformity with the practice and procedure known in Judicial Review applications.
By the facts of this case the appropriate title should be: THE REPUBLIC VRS. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL - RESPONDENT EX PARTE, ERIC FROKU TETTEH & 3 ORS - APPLICANTS MINISTRY OF EDUCATION - INTERESTED(NATIONAL TEACHING COUNCIL) PARTY 2. LEGAL FRAME WORK OF JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATIONS The power of judicial review invested in the High Court, could be found in ARTICLES 23 and 141 of the Constitution.
ARTICLE 23 of the 1992 Constitution provides: “Administrative bodies and administrative officials shall act, fairly and reasonably and comply with requirements imposed on them by law and persons aggrieved by the exe