REPUBLIC v. STOOL LANDS BOUNDARIES SETTLEMENT COMMISSION; EX PARTE ASIBU

JUDGMENT OF KORANTENG-ADDOW J.

By article 114 (1) of the Constitution, 1979 the judicial power of Ghana is vested in the judiciary, and no organ or agency of the executive or legislature has any final judicial, power. The Stool Lands Boundaries Settlement Decree, 1973 (NRCD 172), s. 4 confers judicial power on the Stool Lands Boundaries Settlement Commissioner to hear and determine questions or disputes relating to the boundaries of stool lands. In this application, Mr. da Rocha has submitted that NRCD 172 is inconsistent with article 114 of the Constitution, 1979 because the commissioner is an organ or agency of the Ministry of Lands which is part of the executive. He has therefore called upon the court to prohibit the commissioner from hearing this case and to refer the matter to the Supreme Court for its opinion.

[p.1042]

The applicant in this matter is one of the parties in a boundary dispute which is before the commissioner. The dispute is entitled: "In the matter of the boundary dispute between Gomoa Fetteh and Awutu and Co. and (1) Nai Odupong Awushie Tetteh II, Ebla Odefey of Awutu Traditional Area, Awutu, (2) Nai Kwaku Bentum II, Ema Twufi Odefey of Awutu and Wulomo Mensah of Amanfrom Odupong-Kpehe Market (Kasewa), Senya Breku Paramount Stool . . ." During the course of the hearing by the commissioner, counsel drew his attention to the provisions of the Constitution, 1979, and invited him to refer the matter to the Supreme Court under article 118(2) of the Constitution, 1979. The commissioner ruled that he has jurisdiction and proceeded to hear the matter. But in fairness to him, Mr da Rocha told the court that since this application was served on the commissioner, he has suspended further hearing pending the outcome of these proceedings.

I must say that there are no counter arguments to these submissions. Even though an affidavit in opposition was filed on behalf of the respondent by the registrar of the commissioner, the Attorney-General's representative who has been appearing on his behalf did not attend court to reply to submissions by counsel for the applicant. So I had no assistance from that quarter. I was constrained to hear the matter after some adjournments.

There is no dispute about the status of the Stool Lands Boundaries Settlement Commissioner. It is an administrative tribunal, and from the provisions of the NRCD 172, it is plain that it is enmeshed in the administrative machinery of the Ministry of Lands and an agency or orga