|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1997 |
|
|
Constitutional Court lacked jurisdiction to hear direct Article 50 enforcement claims; petition time‑barred and struck out.
* Constitutional law – Jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court – Article 50 enforcement actions are not directly before the Constitutional Court except by reference under Article 137(5).
* Constitutional procedure – Rules – Legal Notice No.4 of 1996 validly applies and its 30‑day limitation is mandatory.
* Election law – Presidential and Parliamentary election petitions lie respectively to the Supreme Court (Art.104) and High Court (Art.86) within statutory time limits.
* Civil procedure – Representative actions require disclosure of authority and leave (Order 1 r.8).
|
19 December 1997 |
|
Constitutional Court has no direct Article 50 enforcement jurisdiction; petition time‑barred and improperly representative.
* Constitutional jurisdiction – Article 137 – scope and limits; * Enforcement of rights – Article 50 – not directly in Constitutional Court (requires reference under Art.137(5)); * Procedural rules – Legal Notice No.4/1996 valid; 30‑day limitation mandatory; * Election disputes – Presidential (Art.104) in Supreme Court; Parliamentary (Art.86) in High Court; * Representative actions – require leave/authority (Order I r.8).
|
18 December 1997 |
|
Applicants invoked Article 137 for Article 50 relief; petition was time‑barred, premature and procedurally defective.
Constitutional jurisdiction—Article 137 v Article 50; Procedural time‑limits—Rule 4(1) Legal Notice No.4 (30 days); Prematurity—abstention where appeal pending; Mandatory affidavit—Rule 3(6) and Rule 12(1).
|
15 December 1997 |
|
A constitutional petition challenging prosecution must be stayed where related criminal proceedings are pending.
Constitutional procedure – stay of constitutional petition where related criminal proceedings are pending; petition not to be used to pre-empt or circumvent ongoing prosecution; question of constitutionality not determined when parallel criminal trial pending; reliance on precedent (Const. Petition No.4/97).
|
14 December 1997 |
|
Petition struck out: time‑barred, wrong respondent, and no cause to challenge a final Court of Appeal election decision.
Constitutional procedure – time limits for constitutional petitions under Rule 4(1) Directions 1996; Government Proceedings – immunity for acts of judicial officers (s.4(5) Government Proceedings Act; Art.128(4)); Finality of judicial decisions – election appeal decisions final (s.96(3) Parliamentary Elections Statute) and not reviewable by Constitutional Court under Art.137; Procedure – trial courts should frame and refer constitutional issues after recording evidence.
|
13 December 1997 |
| November 1997 |
|
|
Court stayed the constitutional petition and remitted the matter to the trial court to continue and refer constitutional issues if warranted.
* Constitutional law – immunity of judicial officers – prosecution for acts done in course of judicial proceedings – Section 15 Penal Code and Article 128(4) of the Constitution.
* Constitutional procedure – interplay between criminal trial and constitutional questions – trial court to continue and refer constitutional issues if they arise.
* Practice – stay of constitutional petition pending continuation of criminal proceedings and possible reference to Constitutional Court.
|
19 November 1997 |
| June 1997 |
|
|
Statutory vagueness of 'witchcraft' invalidates convictions; banishment orders are unconstitutional and inhuman.
Constitutional law – criminal law – vagueness: statutory offences must be defined to satisfy Article 28(12); evidence cannot cure lack of definition – exclusion/banishment orders as sentence: exclusion that deprives access to subsistence or property is cruel, inhuman or degrading and violates Articles 24, 26 and 29(2).
|
13 June 1997 |
|
Petition failed to disclose cause of action against the Attorney General; matter struck out and costs ordered against counsel.
Constitutional law – cause of action – liability of Attorney General – judicial immunity (Article 128(4)) – private prosecution – local government as body corporate (Local Governments Act).
|
13 June 1997 |
| April 1997 |
|
|
|
25 April 1997 |
|
Whether the applicant's privileged parliamentary testimony and public‑service appointment precluded military disciplinary action and military resignation rules.
Constitutional law – Parliamentary privilege (Art.97) – protection of witnesses called before parliamentary committees; Forced labour (Art.25) – applicability where public‑service appointment severs military service; Military law vs public service – when appointment to public office terminates serving status; Resignation procedure (Reg.28(1)) – inapplicable to person no longer a serving officer; Commission – substantive form suffices despite deviation from prescribed warrant form.
|
25 April 1997 |
| March 1997 |
|
|
Constitutional right of access and non-derogable fair hearing override Section 121; state must prove security prejudice and court may sit in camera.
Evidence — admissibility of unpublished official records; Evidence Act s.121 vs. Constitution — right of access to information (Art.41) and non-derogable fair hearing (Arts.28,44); saved laws (Art.273) construed to conform with the Constitution; state must prove prejudice to national security; court may hear sensitive material in camera.
|
5 March 1997 |