May 17, 2023
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Supreme Court of Ghana, per Amegatcher JSC, exercised its original jurisdiction to interpret and enforce Article 94(2)(a) in a dispute over James Gyakye Quayson’s qualification to serve as Member of Parliament for Assin North. The plaintiff argued that Quayson, a dual Ghanaian-Canadian citizen at nomination, owed allegiance to Canada and was thus disqualified. The Electoral Commission nonetheless permitted his candidacy and he was elected and sworn in. The Attorney-General urged an objective construction that equates allegiance with citizenship and emphasized that renunciation is effective only upon issuance of a foreign certificate. Citing Zanetor Rawlings and Bielbiel, the Court held the material time is nomination; allegiance equates to citizenship; and renunciation must be legally completed before filing. As Quayson lacked a Canadian renunciation certificate by 9 October 2020, the Court granted all declaratory reliefs, declared his election and swearing-in unconstitutional, and ordered Parliament to expunge his name.
AMEGATCHER JSC:-
The controversy in this suit centers on the interpretation and enforcement of article 94 (2) (a). The plaintiff invoked the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 2 (1) (b) of the Constitution, 1992 to seek the following declaratory reliefs:
1. A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 94 (2) (a) of the Constitution,
1992 of the Republic of Ghana, at the time of filing his nomination forms between 5th -9th October 2020 to contest the 2020 Parliamentary elections for the Assin North Constituency, the 1st Defendant was not qualified as a Member of Parliament.
2. A Declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 94(2) (a) of the Constitution,
1992 the decision of the 2htl Defendant to permit the 1st Defendant to contest the Parliamentary Elections in the Assin North Constituency when the 1st Defendant owed allegiance to a country other than Ghana is inconsistent with and violates Article 94(2)(a) of the Constitution, 1992 of the Republic of Ghana.
3. A Declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 94(2) (a) of the Constitution,
1992 of the Republic of Ghana the election of the 1st Defendant as Member of Parliament for Assin North Constituency was unconstitutional.
4. A Declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 94(2) (a) of the Constitution,
1992 of the Republic of Ghana the swearing in of 1st defendant as Member of Parliament for the Assin North Constituency was unconstitutional, null and void and of no legal effect. 5. Any further Orders and or Directions as the Court may deem fit to give effect or enable effect to be given to the Court.
Article 2(1) (a) and (b); article 130 (1) (a); 94 (1) and article 94 (2) of the Constitution,1992 respectively read:
ENFORCEMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION
2. (I) A person who alleges that
(a) an enactment or anything contained in or done, under the authority of that or any other enactment;
or
(b) any act or omission of any person; is inconsistent with or is in contravention of a provision of this Constitution, may bring an action in the Supreme Court for a declaration to that effect.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT
130 (I) Subject to the jurisdiction of the High Court in the enforcement of the Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms as provided in article 33 of this Constitution, the Supreme Court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction in -
(a) all matters relating to the en