March 9, 2022
SUPREME COURT
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Supreme Court of Ghana, per a majority opinion authored by E. Yonny Kulendi, JSC, with a separate concurrence by G. Torkornoo, JSC and Honyenuga, JSC joining, dismissed James Gyakye Quayson’s motion invoking supervisory jurisdiction to quash the Court of Appeal, Cape Coast’s 13 December 2021 refusal to stay proceedings and to refer Article 94(2)(a) to the Supreme Court for interpretation. The Court held that certiorari is confined to patent errors of law apparent on the face of the record and the Court of Appeal committed none; the application was premature and ill‑founded because the motion and affidavit lacked key materials and there was no proof of transmission of the record (Form 6) or leave to rely on it. The Court emphasized that Article 130(2) does not mandate automatic referral; lower courts must ascertain a real and genuine interpretative issue and proceed by case stated under Rule 67 of C.I. 16. Additionally, with a pending writ (Suit No. J1/11/2022) seeking interpretation of Article 94(2)(a), a self‑referral was unnecessary. Dordzie, JSC, dissented—joined by Pwamang, JSC—agreeing certiorari was improper but advocating a stay and referral of Article 94(2)(a) to the Supreme Court.
MAJORITY OPINION
KULENDI JSC:-
INTRODUCTION
This is a motion on notice for an order of certiorari directed at the Court of Appeal, Cape Coast, to bring up to this Court, for the purposes of being quashed, the ruling of the Court dated 13th December, 2021 by which ruling, the Court of Appeal refused the Applicant’s motion for a stay of proceedings and reference to this Court for the interpretation Article 94(2)(a) of the Constitution.
BACKGROUND
The Applicant was elected Member of Parliament for the Assin North Constituency on December 7th, 2020 and sworn in Parliament on 7th January, 2021. Upon the election of the Applicant as Member of Parliament for the constituency aforementioned, the 1st Interested Party petitioned the High Court, Cape Coast and contended that at the time of the filing of the nomination forms by the Applicant, the Applicant held Canadian citizenship in violation of Article 94[2][a] of the Constitution, Section 9(2)(a) of the Representation of the Peoples Act 1992 (PNDCL 284), and the Public Elections Regulations, 2020 [C.I. 127]. It was further contended before the High Court that at the time of the Parliamentary Elections in the Assin North Constituency, the Applicant was not qualified to contest as a candidate for the Assin North Constituency in accordance with the electoral laws for the time being in force. The 1st Interested Party therefore
sought orders cancelling the parliamentary elections and further orders prohibiting the Applicant from holding himself out as Member of Parliament for the Assin North Constituency and for the Electoral Commission to conduct fresh elections in the Assin North Constituency.
The High Court, on 28th July, 2021, delivered a 68-page judgment distilling the issues and granted the prayers of the 1st Interested Party and held in part as follows:
“Therefore, it is the Court's ruling that by virtue of the clear and unambiguous provisions of the electoral laws for the time being in Ghana and in the face of the overwhelming available evidence, 1st Respondent herein was not qualified to contest as a Member of Parliament for the 2020 Parliamentary Elections organized by 2nd Respondent in the Assin North Constituency.”
The High Court therefore cancelled the Parliamentary elections, perpetually restrained the Applicant from holding himself as Member of Parliament for the Assin North Constituency and further ordered that the Electoral Commission conduct fresh elections for the Constituency.
Aggrie