Constitutional Law Cases on Jurisdiction Of The Supreme Court

Aduamoa II v. Twum II

Court: Supreme Court

Year: 2000

Principle(s): The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to entertain a cause or matter affecting chieftaincy on first instance. It, however, has an appellate jurisdiction to entertain a cause or matter affecting chieftaincy from the decision of the National House of Chiefs

Federation of Youth Association of Ghana (FEDYAG) v. Public Universities of Ghana and Other

Court: Supreme Court of Ghana

Year: 2010

Principle(s): Exclusive jurisdiction of the High Court to enforce constitutional provisions of a personal nature. However, a person without a personal interest may institute an action for the enforcement of all constitutional provisions, even if it is on human rights. Also, if an action is for a declaration that an act is inconsistent with the Constitution, even if human rights provisions are involved, the Supreme Court has jurisdiction.

Republic v. The High Court (Ex Parte Zanetor)

Court: Supreme Court of Ghana

Year: 2016

Principle(s): When an issue of interpretation arises in Courts lower than the Supreme Court, the Court ought to stay proceedings and refer the issue to the Supreme Court; The eligibility criteria become alive at the time of filing ones nomination with the Electoral Commission.

Ezuame Mannan v. The Attorney-General and Speaker of Parliament

Court: Supreme Court

Year: 2017

Principle(s): 1. The Supreme Court has the power of judicial review, and the independence of Parliament does not affect that power; 2. Ghana operates a constitutional supremacy, not a parliamentary supremacy; 3. The Directive Principles of State Policy are prima facie justiciable; 4. Even if Ghana were to breach an international treaty obligation, such a breach “cannot be said to be the basis for an action against the state for failing in general to promote respect for international law”, as required by Article 40; 5. Failure to follow the procedure for the exercise of legislative authority will lead to a law being null and void. (procedural limitation); 6. When an enactment violates the letter and spirit of the Constitution, it shall be struck down as unconstitutional.

Bimpong-Buta v. General Legal Council and Others

Court: Supreme Court

Year: 2003-2005

Principle(s): The Supreme Court has jurisdiction to entertain a suit if: the suit involves genuine issues of interpretation and the provisions needing interpretation have not been previously interpreted; it involves the enforcement of a non-human rights provision of the constitution (jurisdiction lies with the High Court in human rights cases); it questions the legality of an enactment by Parliament or any other authority; and it cannot be resolved by other competent courts without infringing upon the exclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

Asare v. Attorney General and Another (Professional Law Course v Academic Law Course)

Court: Supreme Court

Year: 2020

Principle(s): An action will be dismissed if it does not properly invoke the enforcement or interpretative jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

British Airways & Another v. Attorney-General

Court: Supreme Court

Year: 1997-98

Principle(s): In the exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction, the Supreme Court can order lower courts to discontinue a trial; The court will not declare non-existent laws null and void.

The Republic v. Maikankan & Others

Court: Supreme Court, Ghana

Year: 1971

Principle(s): If a lower court thinks that a provision is clear and unambiguous, no reference needs to be made to the supreme court for interpretation of said provision; A jury is not necessary for trial of offences not punishable by death or life imprisonment.

Justice Abdulai v. The Attorney-General

Court: Supreme Court

Year: 2022

Principle(s): Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to interpret provisions of the 1992 Constitution; Meaning of Articles 102 and 104(1); Meaning of political question doctrine and its non-applicability in Ghana; Constitutional supremacy versus parliamentary supremacy, the prevalence of the former in Ghana; Rule of law and the limits on parliament in Ghana; The 1992 Constitution as the grundnorm.

Adjei-Ampofo (No. 1) v. Accra Metropolitan Assembly & Attorney-General

Court: Court

Year: 2007-2008

Principle(s): Only citizens of Ghana can bring an action under Article 2(1) for the enforcement and interpretation of the 1992 Constitution; Citizens and non-citizens can bring an action in the High Court for the enforcement of their personal human rights under Article 33(1); The essence of Article 2(1) is to foster the enforcement of all provisions of the 1992 Constitution; Citizens of Ghana have the locus to seek enforcement of any provision of the 1992 Constitution.