JOSEPH SAM v. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL

The Supreme Court of Ghana considered an interlocutory application by the Divestiture Implementation Committee (DIC) and its officer Emmanuel Amuzu Agbodo seeking to be joined as co-defendants in the pending original-jurisdiction suit Joseph Sam v. Attorney-General (Suit No. 5/98). Joseph Sam’s underlying claim challenges the constitutionality of section 15 of the Divestiture of State Interests (Implementation) Law, 1993 (PNDCL 326), alleging inconsistency with Articles 140(1) and 293(2)–(3) of the 1992 Constitution. The applicants argued joinder was necessary because section 15 confers indemnity on them for acts in implementing divestiture, so the case directly affects their legal interests. The plaintiff opposed, asserting their interests coincide with the State represented by the Attorney-General and that joinder would complicate and delay proceedings. Writing for the majority, Ampiah J.S.C. held joinder was unnecessary because the issue is purely the law’s constitutional validity, with no allegations against the applicants. Bamford-Addo, Acquah, and Akuffo concurred. Atuguba J.S.C. dissented, advocating a wider joinder under Rule 45(4) to include interested parties.