Eskwai logo
Verify now as a student, judge or newly called lawyer for access to discounted plans.

THE REPUBLIC v. THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL EX-PARTE: JUSTICE KWAME OHENE-ESSEL (RTD)

2020

SUPREME COURT

Areas of Law

  • Constitutional Law
  • Administrative Law
  • Civil Procedure

AI Generated Summary

The Supreme Court of Ghana, per Dotse JSC, resolved a constitutional reference originating from a High Court judicial review application by retired High Court Judge Justice Kwame Ohene-Essel against the Chief Justice and the Attorney-General. The reference asked whether, under Articles 146(3) and (5), a judge who had compulsorily retired by age could nonetheless enjoy pension and gratuity under Article 155(1)(b) when impeachment proceedings had not progressed beyond a prima facie determination, partly because he exercised his right to challenge matters in court. After recounting the Tiger Eye PI petition and the sequence of suspension, half-salary, and a retirement letter withholding benefits, the Court applied a purposive interpretive approach, emphasized Article 19 fair trial guarantees at the committee stage, and held that Article 146 applies only to serving judges. Drawing on Frank Kwadwo Amoah and Ansu-Gyeabour, and distinguishing Edward Boateng, the Court affirmed that Ohene-Essel’s retirement benefits must be paid and recommended procedural reforms for timely impeachment processes.

JUDGMENT