Re BOOK ALERT: 
Welcome
....to JusticeGhana Group
JusticeGhana is a Non-Governmental [and-not-for- profit] Organization (NGO) with a strong belief in Justice, Security and Progress....” More Details
Supreme Court sets June 14 for review of Mornah’s case
- Details
- Parent Category: Justice & Security
- Category: Law Reports
- Created on Monday, 03 June 2013 00:00
- Hits: 2837
Supreme Court sets June 14 for review of Mornah’s case
The Supreme Court has set June 14, 2013, as the date to hear an application brought before it by the National Youth Organizer of the People’s National Convention, Abu Ramadan, who is asking the court to review its decision to allow any party aggrieved with the judgment of a presidential petition to file for a review.The Court on April 30, 2013 ruled in favour of a writ filed by the General Secretary of the PNC, Bernard Mornah, who had argued that a portion of Rule 69C(5) and a portion of Form 30 of the Supreme Court (Amendment) Rules, 2012 (C.I. 74) did not appear to be consistent with some provisions of the 1992 Constitution.
The court in its ruling stated that by Rule 69 C (5) of Constitutional Instrument 74, which provides in part that "the court shall sit from day to day, including public holidays, when hearing a presidential election petition”, was unconstitutional and, therefore, null and void.
It again ruled that Rule 71B of C.I. 74 which provides that the decision of the Supreme Court in respect of a petition presented to challenge the election of a President cannot be reviewed, was also unconstitutional, null and void, and of no effect.
However, the National Youth Organiser of the same party, in an affidavit in support of his application for review, has elucidated that though he was not an original party to the constitutional writ titled Suit No. JI/7/2013 between Bernard Mornah and the Attorney-General “a decision of which was handed down by this Honourable Court, on 30th April 2013; I am pioneering this review application in defence of the Constitution.”
Abu Ramadan is also praying the court to review its decision not to sit on public holidays and weekends on a presidential petition.
He believes the decision of the court undermined the 1992 Constitution itself, adding that the powers of the Judiciary had been unfortunately subordinated to the Executive, the existing body of law and, procedure was thrown into confusion, among others, which presented exceptional circumstances which, respectfully, were compelling enough to persuade the Supreme Court to review the decision of the court dated 30th April 2013.
According to him, he is appealing the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling based on his rights as stipulated under Articles 2 and 3 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana to seek a review.
Political pundits like the Editor-in-Chief of the Crusading Guide, Malik Kweku Baako, and Gabby Asare Otchere Darko, Executice Director of the Danquah Institute, have all expressed their dissatisfaction with the court’s decision.
Mr Kweku Baako described as senseless and a clear show of timidity on the part of the Supreme Court to have restricted itself from sitting on public holidays to hear election petition.
Mr Otchere Darko also criticized the bench’s ruling on the case, saying the court showed timidity in handling the case and failed to stamp its authority. He, however, apologised to the court latter for the use of the word ‘timidity’.
By Nana Yaw Dwamena
Source: thestatesmanonline.com
