Kpebu Vrs Attorney General [2016] GHASC 26 (5 December 2016)

Kpebu Vrs Attorney General [2016] GHASC 26 (5 December 2016)

The Statute Law Revision Commissioner acted within the powers conferred by Act 562/1998. The omission of marital consent as a defence in section 42(g) of Act 29, having been adopted by Parliament, is attributable to Parliament, not the Commissioner. The plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the amendment was ultra vires or unconstitutional. All reliefs sought are denied.

Citation
[2016] GHASC 26
Parties
Plaintiff: Martin Kpebu; Defendant: Attorney-General
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
5 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's writ dismissed. All reliefs denied.
Legal Topics
Legislative Power, Statute Law Revision, Judicial Review, Parliamentary Approval, Criminal Law
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Statutory Interpretation Legislative Power Statute Law Revision Judicial Review Parliamentary Approval Criminal Law

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin Kpebu

Plaintiff

Attorney-General

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Statute Law Revision Commissioner exceeded powers under Act 562/1998 by omitting marital consent as a defence in section 42(g) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29)
  2. 2 Whether such omission amounted to an unconstitutional usurpation of Parliament's legislative power under Article 93(2) of the Constitution, 1992
  3. 3 Whether the Commissioner's explanatory footnote was a usurpation of judicial power under Article 125(3) of the Constitution, 1992

Ratio Decidendi

The Statute Law Revision Commissioner acted within the powers conferred by Act 562/1998. The omission of marital consent as a defence in section 42(g) of Act 29, having been adopted by Parliament, is attributable to Parliament, not the Commissioner. The plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the amendment was ultra vires or unconstitutional. All reliefs sought are denied.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's writ dismissed. All reliefs denied.