SUMAILA BIEBIEL v. ADAMU DRAMANI
April 22, 2010
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- F. KUSI-APPIAH, J.A. (PRESIDING)
- KORBIEH F.G., J.A.
- IRENE DANQUAH (MS.), J.A
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Constitutional Law
April 22, 2010
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
F. Kusi-Appiah, J.A., writing for the Court of Appeal, addressed the appeal by Adamu Dramani, Member of Parliament for Bawku Central, from a High Court default judgment obtained by Sumaila Biebiel. The High Court (Asiedu J.) had declared Dramani disqualified on the basis that he held a British passport, restrained him from acting as an MP, and ordered him to vacate his seat, without taking evidence. On appeal, the Court noted that a differently constituted Court of Appeal had already, on 18 March 2010, held that the High Court lacked jurisdiction. Applying Article 136(5) of the 1992 Constitution and the doctrine of mootness elaborated in Supreme Court authorities, the Court concluded that no live controversy remained. It therefore struck out the appeal as moot, with no order as to costs. Korbieh, J.A., and Irene Danquah, J.A., expressly agreed.
KUSI-APPIAH, J.A.:
On the 15th day of July 2009, the High Court, Fast Track Division, Accra, presided over by ASIEDU J., granted an application for judgment in default of defence at the instance of the Plaintiff/Respondent (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) against the Defendant/Appellant (hereinafter referred to as the Defendant).
In his ruling, the learned Judge said among other things:
“I will therefore enter judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant herein for all the reliefs endorsed on the plaintiff’s writ of summons and I therefore:
1. Declare that the defendant is a holder of a British Passport and therefore owes allegiance to a country other than Ghana and is therefore disqualified from holding the office of Member of Parliament of the Republic of Ghana.
2. Consequently, I restrain the defendant from holding himself out as a Member of Parliament and I therefore order him to vacate his seat in Parliament.”
It is against this ruling that the defendant has appealed to this court on the following grounds:
“a. The judgment of the court was erroneous having regard to the application before it.
b. The judgment was given in breach of the rules of court.
c. The judgment was contrary to law.
d. The trial judge erred in law when he failed to take into account the pendency of the defendant/appellant’s application for stay of proceedings at the Court of Appeal.
e. The trial judge erred in law when he proceeded to declare that the defendant/appellant is a holder of a British Passport and therefore owes allegiance to a country other than Ghana and is therefore disqualified from holding the office of Member of Parliament of the Republic of Ghana.
f. The trial judge erred in law when he proceeded to restrain defendant/appellant from holding himself out as a Member of Parliament and also ordering defendant/appellant to vacate his seat in Parliament without further proceedings.
g. Additional grounds of appeal shall be filed upon receipt of the Record of Appeal.”
I must say that this intimation to file further grounds of appeal was not carried out.
The facts which gave rise to the dispute were as follows: On 7 December 2008, Mr. Adamu Dramani, the defendant herein was elected in a nationwide parliamentary election as the Member of Parliament for Bawku Central Constituency. He subsequently took his seat in Parliament as the Member of Parliament for Bawku Central on 7 January, 2009.
On 9 February, 2009, Mr. Sumaila Biebiel claiming to b