REPUBLIC v. JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF VOLTA REGION HOUSE OF CHIEFS
2012
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- APALOO JA (PRESIDING)
- DUOSE JA
- OFOE JA
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
- Civil Procedure
2012
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Court of Appeal reviewed a dispute arising from proceedings before the Judicial Committee of the Volta Region House of Chiefs involving a chieftaincy contest and related judicial review applications. The appellants challenged the High Court’s refusal to prohibit the Committee’s Legal Advisor, Mr. Kodzo-Kumah Dzanku, from assisting in a pending case after proving he concurrently represented the 4th Interested Party in separate land litigation at the Kpando Circuit Court. Although the High Court had granted certiorari on other aspects, the appellate court focused on natural justice and the appearance of fairness, emphasizing that justice must be seen to be done. Acknowledging the statutory breadth of the Legal Advisor’s role under Act 759, the Court found that doubts about potential influence warranted restraint. The appeal was allowed and the Legal Advisor was prohibited from participating in the chieftaincy trial.
APALOO JA;
This is an appeal from the decision of the High Court Ho dated 19th February 2010. As to part of the decision complained of, the Appellants stated that “so much of the judgment as dismissed the application for the grant of an order of prohibition against the Respondents, the Judicial Committee of the Volta Region House of Chiefs”. The Applicants/Appellants had invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court for;
(1) An order of certiorari to quash certain orders of the Respondent House awarding costs against them and
(2) An order of prohibition, prohibiting the Respondent House from Hearing and determining the Chieftaincy matter titled Togbe Afendza III and 2 Others Vrs Longinus Agbodra & 7 Others pending before it on grounds of bias and impartiality on the part of its Legal Counsel in the person of Mr. Kodzo-Kumah Dzanku.
The earlier part of the judgment had granted the Appellants’ motion for an order of certiorari. The facts leading to the application in the Court below are straight forward. The Appellants had commenced an action before the Judicial Committee of the Volta Region House of Chiefs against the Interested Parties/Respondents to prevent Togbui Dadadu VIII, the 8th Interested Party/Respondent from putting or holding himself out and performing the duties of the Paramount Chief of Akpini Traditional Area.
In the course of proceedings the Appellants filed the motion for the Judicial Review on the basis that the 3rd Respondent who was described as the Head of Family died in the course of the proceedings and was not substituted and further that the Legal Counsel for the Judicial Committee, in private practice is a Lawyer for 4th Respondent in a land litigation at the Circuit Court Kpando and hence should be prohibited from assisting the Judicial Committee.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Regional Judicial Committee of three Chiefs (see Section 28(2) of Act 759) cannot exercise its judicial functions without the statutory presence of a statutory qualified and appointed Lawyer. Section 28(4) of Act 759 provides that;
“A Judicial Committee appointed under this section shall be assisted by a Lawyer of not less than five years standing appointed by the Regional House on the recommendation of the Attorney-General.”
The functions of such in-house Lawyer has similarly been spelt out by section 33(9) of Act 759 and I quote the section;
“The functions of a Lawyer appointed to assist a Judicial Committee is to advise the commit