PROFESSIONAL MUSICAL SPINNERS ASSOCIATION OF GHANA & 1OR v. EMMANUEL ASHITEYE AFUTU & 8ORs

The Professional Musical Spinners Association of Ghana (PROMSAG) is an incorporated association under the Companies Act, 1963 (Act 179). Its constitution was promulgated on 27-02-1990. One of the aims of PROMSAG, as stated in Article 1(1) of their constitution, is “to secure and maintain complete Unity amongst all Musical Spinners who are members or get to be members of the Association.” This noble aim turns out to a mirage as would be revealed in the circumstances which culminated to the instant action in this court.

On 23-12-2008, PROMSAG (1st plaintiff) and Hon. Nii Amarh Ashitey (the 2 nd plaintiff)) caused a writ to be issued from the registry of this court by which they claim against the defendants the following reliefs:

1. A declaration that the purported election of the defendants as the Greater Accra Regional Executives of the Professional Musical Spinners Association of Ghana (PROMSAG) is null and void:

2. A further declaration that the conduct of the defendants in requesting the second plaintiff to hand over the National Office to the defendants is null and void.

The defendants to this suit numbering nine are the following:

1. Emmanuel Ashiteye Afutu;

2. Joseph Nii Armah Quaye;

3. E. A. Tagoe;

4. Emmanuel Adjei;

5. Samuel Yiadom;

6. John Quatson;

7. Edmund Aryeetey;

8. James Krampah; and

9. Dickson Solomon Nmerteh

The case of the plaintiffs is that the 2 nd plaintiff is the National Chairman of the 1 st plaintiff association. The defendants are all members of the Greater Accra Regional Branch of the association. On 12-12-2008, the defendants, by letter addressed to the 2 nd plaintiff, described themselves as the “Newly elected Executives of PROMSAG, Greater Accra Region” and requested the 2 nd plaintiff to hand over the national office of the association to them from Monday, 15-12-2008. This action of the defendants is unconstitutional and reckless. In pursuance of this conduct, the defendants caused the Kaneshie Police to summon the 2 nd plaintiff to the police station to explain the basis of his position in the association. This prompted the plaintiffs to institute this action claiming the reliefs stated hereinbefore.

The case of the defendants is that the 2 nd plaintiff is not the National Chairman of the association for he had not been elected in accordance with the constitution of the association. The 2 nd plaintiff’s claim to that office, therefore, is illegitimate and unconstitutional. But, in pu