Poultry Farmers Have No Case – AG’s Dpt

The Attorney General's Department has stated that none of the issues in contention in the statement of case of the Ghana Poultry Farmers Association raises any constitutional consequence to warrant the invocation of the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

It said the writ and statement of case seeking to invoke the original jurisdiction of the court was misconceived and devoid of any substance or merit.

These were contained in a statement of case filed by the attorney general at the court in the matter in which the association has sued the attorney general and the Speaker of Parliament to compel them to enforce the Constitution by implementing the 20 per cent additional tariff on imported poultry products.

It is also seeking an injunction against the defendants and their agents, restraining them from proceeding with the implementation of tariff levels imposed by the old tariffs regime, Act 686, because it is inconsistent with Article 107 (a) of the Constitution.

Furthermore, the association is praying the court for a declaration that by the enactment of Act 686, the defendants retroactively imposed a burden on the association's members to endure more intense competition from foreign poultry products, contrary to the Constitution.

According to the attorney general's statement, the writ and statement of case of the plaintiff did not disclose any reasonable cause of action and was, therefore, an abuse of the court's processes which must be dismissed.

It said for any person to successfully invoke the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Section 107 (a) of the Constitution, the first responsibility of the person was to show that there had been a judgement or decision of a court.

The statement contended that the ruling of the High Court was not a judgement or decision and, therefore, could not form the basis for the action, adding that the judge made it explicitly clear that she was not delivering a judgement or decision.

In its ruling, the trial judge ordered that both the attorney general and the minister for finance and economic planning were to be joined in the action to enable them to make their representations appropriately and be heard.