Eskwai logo
Verify now as a student, judge or newly called lawyer for access to discounted plans.

PROFESSOR STEPHEN KWAKU ASARE v. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL

2015

SUPREME COURT

GHANA

CORAM

  • WOOD (MRS), CJ PRESIDING
  • DOTSE, JSC
  • YEBOAH, JSC
  • BONNIE, JSC
  • GBADEGBE, JSC
  • BENIN, JSC
  • AKAMBA, JSC

Areas of Law

  • Constitutional Law
  • Administrative Law

AI Generated Summary

A private citizen challenged executive‑led constitutional review initiatives under Ghana’s 1992 Constitution. President John Evans Atta Mills created the Constitution Review Commission (CRC) by C.I. 64 to collect public views and recommend amendments; after issuing a White Paper accepting most recommendations, he established the Constitution Review Implementation Committee (CRIC) to draft bills, which the Attorney‑General laid before Parliament to amend entrenched and non‑entrenched provisions. In a 5–2 decision, the Supreme Court held that formal amendments must follow Chapter 25 and Parliament alone may pass an Act to amend; Parliament’s amendment power cannot be delegated or usurped. However, the Court rejected the claim that all pre‑legislative activities are Parliament’s exclusive preserve. Applying purposive and sui generis interpretation, and relying on implied powers (article 297(c)) and article 106(14), the majority upheld the President’s use of article 278 commissions (CRC) and CRIC as preparatory, administrative steps that do not usurp Parliament. The Chief Justice noted that using a Commission of Inquiry was not strictly appropriate but nonetheless constitutional. Justices Dotse and Anin‑Yeboah dissented, deeming CRC and CRIC unconstitutional and insisting that initiation and management of the amendment process belong solely to Parliament.