The Supreme Court has adjourned businessman, Mr. Alfred Agbesi Woyome’s, review application indefinitely (sine die) at the instance of a writ filed by a private legal practitioner, seeking the interpretation of articles 2 (1), 128, 130 and 134 of the 1992 Constitution.
The plaintiff said that the aforementioned articles of the Constitution did not give a single judge of the Apex court jurisdiction to determine matter or matters involving the interpretation and enforcement of the Constitution..
Mr. Ametefe’s application is against the backdrop of a ruling given by Mr. Justice Anin Yeboah, Supreme Court judge, on November 16, 2016, granting Mr. Martin Alamisi Amidu, a former Attorney General, the opportunity to orally examine Mr. Woyome on oath whether he (Woyome) had property to use for the payment of the GH¢51.2 million he received from the State as judgement debt.
According to Mr. Ametefe “a court sitting as a singly judge lacks the jurisdiction to interpret and/or enforce provisions of the constitution, much less, give an order that is inconsistent with express, clear and unambiguous provisions of the constitution”.
In this light, the three-member review panel of judges comprising, Justices Sophia Akuffo (President), Julius Ansah and Sophia Adinyira adjourned the case indefinitely (sine die).
The definitive date for the hearing of Mr. Ametefe’s application for the constitutional interpretation of Articles 2 (1), 128 130 and 138 is Tuesday, December 13, 2016.
Ms. Justice Akuffo said that the attention of the court had been drawn to an application on another matter which had a bearing on the review case.
“Our collective Wisdom dictates that the matter be adjourned till the outcome of the other application and, therefore, adjourn this case before us sine die”, she sated.
Mr. Ametefe is “graciously” seeking five reliefs of “A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of Articles 2(1), 128, 130 and 134 of the 1992 Constitutions a singly justice of the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to determine matter(s) involving the interpretation of the Constitution.
He also sought “a declaration that the ruling of His Lordship, Justice Anin Yeboah JSC sitting as a single Justice of the Supreme Court, delivered on 16th November, 2016 in the case intituled Martin Alamisi Amidu v The Attorney General & 2 Ors (Civil Motion. No. J8/9/2017) granting the opportunity to Mr. Martin Alamisi Amidu to execute the judgement in Martin Alamisi Amidu v The Attorney General & 2 Ors Suit Number J7/10/2013 is inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 2(1), 128, 130 and 134 of the 1992 Constitution.
A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of Articles 2(1) and (88) of the 1992 Constitution, a private person does not have the capacity to execute a judgment in favour of the state and or on behalf of the state’.
By Castro Zangina-Tong