How Tsatsu Tsikata and Nana Akuffo Addo Teamed Up against the Attorney General in 1979

The Precedent to Dismissal of a Chief Justice in Ghana

In the First Republic, President Nkrumah unjustly dismissed the Chief Justice (CJ), Sir Kobina Arku Korsah on December 11, 1963. Earlier in 1962, there was a bombing attack on President Nkrumah at Kulungugu in Upper East Region. Five persons were prosecuted for the bombing. At the end of the trial, the Court presided over by CJ Arku Korsah did not find three of the accused persons guilty of the offence.

The Court ruling irked President Nkrumah and he dismissed the Chief Justice two days after the verdict. It would be recalled that the First Republican Constitution, 1960 provided under Article 44 (3), “The appointment of a Judge as Chief Justice may at any time be revoked by the President by instrument under the Presidential Seal.” Article 45 of the same Constitution also empowered the President to remove a Supreme Court or a High Court Judge from office subject to a resolution of the National Assembly supported by two-third of Members. The judge’s removal must be on grounds of stated misbehaviour or due to mental or bodily infirmity.

Under the 1960 Constitution, there was Parliament and there was National Assembly. Parliament was made up of the President and the National Assembly (Article 20) whereas the National Assembly consisted of the Speaker and 104 Members known as Members of Parliament (Article 21).

Article 45 further stated, “…the President may at any time for reasons which to him appear sufficient remove from office a Judge of the Supreme Court or Judge of the High Court.” Readers should take note that there was not Court of Appeal (CA) in the First Republic or under the 1960 Constitution. The CA was first introduced in Ghana under Article 102 (4) of the 1969 Constitution (Second Republic).

Consequent to Justice Akorsah’s dismissal, President Nkrumah caused the swift passage of a bill into law by the National Assembly. That law clothed the President with power to set aside any court judgment that he deemed not to be in national interest.

The Legal Collaboration between Nana Addo and Tsatsu Tsikata in the Tuffuor Case in 1979: The Beauty, Fruitfulness and Lessons Therefrom

There is a lot for the youth and for that matter an amateur lawyer to learn from this legal collaboration between Nana Addo and Tsikata. In 1979 when the Tuffuor case started, Nana Addo was 35 years old, Tsukata was 29 years and their client (the plaintiff), Tuffuor was also 35 years (with Nana Addo being older than Tuffuor with about 8 months). One may say that these were young men and they had youthful exuberance. As such, they could choose a violent approach in filing their displeasure. They did not go shooting guns at the Castle or Parliament House to file their displeasure as we saw in some parts of the country during the 2020 voter registration and general elections. They chose the legal way of challenging the Government of Ghana and they were victorious.

Today, we are aware that both Counsels (Nana Addo and Tsikata) belong to opponent political traditions and even at the time, they knew so. However, their collaboration saved not only Chief Justice Apaloo but also enriched jurisprudence in Ghana and further informed the security of tenure of Judges under the 1992 Constitution.

It is also a fact that Tsikata’s defence of clients knows no political bounds. It is on record that he defended people known to be of different political traditions. Apart from Dr. Kwame Amoako Tuffuor, Tsatsu defended other political stalwarts belonging to both the NDC and NPP political traditions. Notable among them are Flt. Lt. Jerry John Rawlings,“Paa Willie” (Mr. William Ofori-Atta, one of the Big Six), Mr. Sammy Okudzeto, John Dramani Mahama, Kofi Awoonor, and Kojo Tsikata. By defending his clients, Tsatsu has demonstrated incessantly that the practice of the legal profession requires neutrality and that neutrality must not be impaired at all. More importantly, partisan politics must not become the altar for that impairment.

Today, the country is over polarised politically and some young men and women attack one another physically even to the point of death. Imagine if the youth of today direct their energies towards ensuring that our institutions function for national development rather than attacking one another physically.

Every big Odum tree germinated from a small seed and every big river has a source or sources smaller than the river itself. As such, our youth should be engaged in contributing their quota to nation building regardless of how small that quota may be.

It is also clear from the 41-year-old case (Tuffuor v Attorney General) that President Limann was a tolerant leader who respected rule of law and did not intimidate the judges nor influence their decisions in the case.

Today’s political leaders must depart from the overly partisan and tribal approaches to doing things. They must focus on relevant synergies that build the nation. Fortunately, Nana Addo and Tsikata are still alive and the former is now President of Ghana. They should instil that 1979 unity not only among young lawyers but also among the youth in general especially political party fanatics who love violence. May the gentle soul of Dr. Kwame Amoako Tuffuor be blessed in eternal peace.

Conclusion

It is argued in this article with evidence that Nana Addo Dankwa Akuffo Addo and the legal luminary Tsatsu Tsikata worked together as Counsels for the plaintiff in a case referred to as Tuffuor v. Attorney-General (1980) GLR 634. The case was about the Limann or the PNP Administration’s attempt to oust Justice Apaloo from office as Chief Justice contrary to the provisions of the 1979 Constitution. As a team, Nana Addo and Tsikata won the case against the Attorney General, Mr. Joe Reindorf. The plaintiff (Tuffuor) and the lead Counsel (Nana Addo) were of the PP or UP (now NPP) tradition while Tsatsu Tsikata has been a known AFRC / PNDC / NDC supporter.

The youthful masses are advised to learn political history of Ghana. It may help them stop getting involved in electoral violence. In the 2020 general elections, the media reported that some people died unnatural deaths due to electoral violence. That was heart breaking and in a way a “foolish death.” Let us be patient and wise in our electoral conducts.

~Asante Sana ~

Author: Philip Afeti Korto

Email: [email protected]