A Seven-Member panel of the Supreme Court has adjourned the suit challenging the National Democratic Congress’ (NDC) celebration of the 31st December coup d’etat (sinie) indefinitely.
The panel chaired by Justice Jones Dotse had support from Justice Yaw Appau, Justice Samuel Marful-Sau, Justice Nene Amegatchar, Justice Prof Nii Ashie Kotey, Justice Agnes Dodzie and Justice Lovelace Johnson.
Prof Stephen Kwaku Asare, the Plaintiff filed the instant application last year in claiming that as an institution with public character, the continuous celebration of the 31st December coup detat contravenes the letter and spirit of Articles 3 (3)(4), 35 (1)(4)(5), 41(b) (d), 55 (4) (5)(11)(12)(17), 15 (1)(2)(b) of the Constitution.
When the case was called, the Attorney General’s department which is the 2nd Defendant through Chief State Attorney, Grace Ewoal moved an application for extension of time to file their statement of case.
The court in ruling on that application granted her 10 days within which to file their Statement of case.
The court also adjourned a similar application for leave by the first respondent, which is the NDC indefinitely.
Background
On March 8, 1994, the Supreme Court of Ghana in the seminal case of New Patriotic Party vs AG held that the use of public funds or other resources of government to celebrate the 31st December coup detat contravenes the 1992 constitution of Ghana.
Although 31st December was not marked as a public holiday, after the decision, the NDC has continued its celebration over the years.
On December 31st, 2019, the NDC organised an event at the Winneba Lorry Park, to commemorate and celebrate the 31st December coup d’etat.
The plaintiff after that celebration dragged the NDC and AG to the apex court arguing further that the celebration and commemoration of the event is in a public forum is inconsistent with the above provisions.
Consequently, the plaintiff the plaintiff claims an order prohibiting any future celebration of 31st December by the NDC and its officers as well as the renting of Public fora for the celebration.
Reliefs
1. A declaration that by the combined effect of Articles 3(3)(4), 35(1)(4)(5), 41(b)(d), 55(5)(11)(12)(17), 15(1) and 15(2)(b) and this Court’s holding in New Patriotic Party v Attorney-General [1993-1994] 2 GLR 35, Republic v Yebbi and Avalifo [1999-2000] 2 GLR 50 and Akufo-Addo and Others v Mahama & Another [2013] GHASC 137, the public celebration or commemoration of the December 31 overthrow of the Constitution, 1979 by the National Democratic Congress is inconsistent with or is in contravention with the letter and spirit of the
Constitution, 1992.
2. A declaration that by the combined effect of Articles 3(3)(4), 35(1)(4)(5), 41(b)(d), 15(1) and 15(2)(b) and this Court’s holding in New Patriotic Party v Attorney-General [1993-1994] 2 GLR 35, Republic v Yebbi and
Avalifo [1999-2000] 2 GLR 50 and Akufo-Addo and Others v Mahama & Another [2013] GHASC 137, the celebration or commemoration of the December 31 overthrow of the Constitution, 1979 in a public forum is inconsistent with or is in contravention with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, 1992.
3. An order directing the National Democratic Congress, its founder, executives, agents, assigns, privies, servants and whomsoever of whatever description to cease and desist from the celebration or commemoration of the December 31 overthrow of the Constitution, 1979.
4. An order directing the government to cease and desist from the renting of public fora to the National Democratic Congress or other public associations for the celebration or commemoration of the December 31
overthrow of the Constitution, 1979.
5. Any other reliefs that this Court deems necessary in exercise of its legal equitable powers.
6. Cost for court expenses and legal service fees.
