REPUBLIC v. CONSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN; EX PARTE BARIMAH II AND ANOTHER
November 26, 1968
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- ANNAN J
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
November 26, 1968
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Nana Kwantwi Barimah II, the Adansihene, sought certiorari and prohibition to quash interlocutory rulings of a constitutional committee chaired by Dr. de Graft Johnson under the Chieftaincy Act, 1961 (Act 81). He alleged bias and interest on the chairman’s part, pointing to the chairman’s wife’s alleged familial ties to Fomena chiefs, the chairman’s past involvement in settling the dispute, and contested rulings concerning the complainants’ capacity and res judicata, as well as hearing management. Applying an objective test, the court held mere suspicion is insufficient and found no cogent independent evidence of familial ties or personal involvement. While the chairman’s advancement of the hearing date and ex parte hearing was unjustifiable, it did not show bias. The court dismissed the applications but ordered the injunction motion be reheard to remedy procedural unfairness.
JUDGMENT OF ANNAN J.
The applicant in these consolidated motions for orders of certiorari and prohibition is the Adansihene Nana Kwantwi Barimah II and the respondent is Dr. de Graft Johnson who is the chairman of a constitutional committee now inquiring into destoolment charges preferred against the Adansihene by two complainants, Nana Techie Mensah II, Kyidomhene of Fomena and Nana Asiedu Bonkuo, Nifahene of Fomena. The committee was set up under the Chieftaincy Act, 1961 (Act 81).
The orders or rulings of the committee sought to be quashed are set down in the motion as:
"(1) The order or ruling dated 2 October 1968 to the effect that the complainants herein have the customary capacity and the statutory capacity by themselves alone to prefer destoolment charges against the Adansihene.
(2) The order or ruling dated 3 October 1968 to the effect that because the National Liberation Council (N.L.C.) per the Chieftaincy Secretariat had appointed Dr. de Graft Johnson to be the chairman his position as such no matter his bias and interest in the matter could not be challenged by the respondent.
(3) The order or ruling of the commission that the issue as to the capacity of the complainants was not res judicata.
(4) The order dated 13 September 1968 calling upon the Counsel for the respondent to reply to the submission of the complainants' counsel in the application for injunction when the counsel for the respondent was not present through no fault of his and the chairman had refused to read over the said submission to the counsel."
The applicant relied on the grounds of bias and interest on the part of the chairman as well as that of "complete disregard of the fundamental conditions of the administration of justice." The applicant supports his applications with a detailed affidavit setting out the matters of fact on which he relies to establish his case and he also relied on affidavits by the Gyasehene of Fomena and the Akwamuhene of Fomena. The respondent's case is also set out at [p.1053] length in his affidavit and he is supported by an affidavit of one of the complainants, the Kyidomhene of Fomena.
The applicant alleged that the respondent's wife, Afua Brafowaah, is related to the first complainant, Nana Techie Mensah, Kyidomhene of Fomena and to the queenmother of Adansi, Adani Pomaa. It is not disputed that Adani Pomaa preferred destoolment charges against the Adansihene in 1963 and that the Kyidomhene and Nifahene, the complainants, joined her t