Ablakwa and Another Vrs Attorney-general and Another [2012] GHASC 32 (22 May 2012)

Ablakwa and Another Vrs Attorney-general and Another [2012] GHASC 32 (22 May 2012)

The majority held that the plaintiffs failed to prove their allegations of discrimination, cronyism, corruption, arbitrariness, capriciousness, conflict of interest, or abuse of discretionary power. No evidence was adduced to substantiate the claims. The allocation and grant of the property to the 2nd Defendant followed due process under the Accra Redevelopment Scheme, and the use to which the land was to be put (development of flats) was consistent with public interest. Claims based on conflict of interest were not justiciable in this forum. The plaintiffs' action was dismissed in its entirety.

Citation
[2012] GHASC 32
Parties
Plaintiff: Mr. Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa; Plaintiff: Dr. Edward Kofi Omane Boamah; 1st Defendant: The Attorney-General; 2nd Defendant: Hon. Jake Otanka Obetsebi-Lamptey
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
22 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiffs' action dismissed in its entirety.
Legal Topics
Public Land Management, Exercise of Discretionary Power, Conflict of Interest, Abuse of Power, Administrative Justice, Discrimination, Redevelopment of Public Property
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Land Law Public Land Management Exercise of Discretionary Power Conflict of Interest Abuse of Power Administrative Justice +2 more

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 6 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr. Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa

Plaintiff

Dr. Edward Kofi Omane Boamah

Plaintiff

The Attorney-General

1st Defendant

Hon. Jake Otanka Obetsebi-Lamptey

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the allocation and sale of Government Bungalow No. 2, St. Mungo Street, Ridge, Accra to the 2nd Defendant was unconstitutional, illegal, discriminatory, or an abuse of discretionary power under the 1992 Constitution of Ghana.
  2. 2 Whether the grant contravened Articles 20(5) & (6), 23, 257, 258, 284, and 296 of the Constitution.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs proved allegations of cronyism, corruption, conflict of interest, arbitrariness, capriciousness, and discrimination.

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that the plaintiffs failed to prove their allegations of discrimination, cronyism, corruption, arbitrariness, capriciousness, conflict of interest, or abuse of discretionary power. No evidence was adduced to substantiate the claims. The allocation and grant of the property to the 2nd Defendant followed due process under the Accra Redevelopment Scheme, and the use to which the land was to be put (development of flats) was consistent with public interest. Claims based on conflict of interest were not justiciable in this forum. The plaintiffs' action was dismissed in its entirety.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' action dismissed in its entirety.