- Information
- AI Chat
Was this document helpful?
Citizenship - case
Course: Constitutional law of Ghana and its history (FLAW306)
346 Documents
Students shared 346 documents in this course
University: University of Ghana
Was this document helpful?
Constitutional law - Citizenship - section 16(2) of the Citizenship Act, 2000 (Act
591) - Conflict with core values embodied in the existing Constitution - The facts
of this case are that the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana (Amendment) Act, 1996
(Act 527) received the Presidential Assent on 16th December 1996. The object of the
Act was to amend the Constitution of Ghana. Section 1 of the Act provides as
follows:“Article 8 of the Constitution is repealed and the following inserted: Article 8 of
the Constitution substituted Dual 8.(1) A citizen of Ghana may hold the citizenship of
any other country in addition to his Citizenship citizenship of Ghana (2)Without
prejudice to article 94 (2) (a) of the Constitution, no citizen of Ghana shall qualify to be
appointed as a holder of any office specified in this clause if he holds the citizenship of
any other country in addition to his citizenship of Ghana. Pursuant to this Constitution of
the Republic of Ghana (Amendment) Act, 1996 (Act 527), the Citizenship Act, 2000 (Act
591) was enacted which contains a section 16(2) which the Plaintiff in this action claims
is unconstitutional. Accordingly, on 27th June 2011 he filed a writ invoking the original
jurisdiction of this court, seeking the following reliefs - PROFESSOR STEPHEN
KWAKU ASARE V THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL WRIT NO. J1 / 6 / 2011 22ND MAY,
2012
Constitutional Law – Dual citizenship - Interpretation - On 30 March 2010 the
plaintiff caused the writ herein to issue claiming the following reliefs: 1. A declaration
that on a true and proper interpretation of articles 97(1) and 94(2)(a) ADAMU
DARAMANI, also known as ADAMU DARAMANI-SAKANDE; ADAMU DARAMANI
SAKANDE; ADAMU SAKANDE, who holds a British Passport and therefore “owes
allegiance to a country other than Ghana” is acting in contravention and in continuous
violation of the 1992 Constitution for as long as he continues to sit in the Parliament of
Ghana. . Any consequential orders the Supreme Court may deem meet.”In the
statement of case filed by the plaintiff, he raised by himself without waiting for the
defendant to be served with the processes initiating the action herein what he described
as an anticipatory legal objection to the jurisdiction of this court to inquire into the claims
contained in the writ. Although the procedure adopted by the plaintiff was quite unusual;
for it is the defendant who ordinarily raises an objection to the jurisdiction of the court,
we allowed the parties to address us on the said question of jurisdiction. Indeed, as was
anticipated by the plaintiff, the defendant did subsequently file an objection to the
jurisdiction of the court. The parties having submitted to us their respective positions on
the question whether or not the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to determine the action
herein, the matter was adjourned for us to pronounce on the said question. - SUMAILA
BIELBIEL VRS ADAMU DARAMANI & OR WRIT NO J1/2/10 DATE: 4TH JULY, 2011