An ' officious' by-stander cannot commit a party for contempt - Supreme Court rules

The Supreme Court has emphasized that a 3rd party cannot cite a party in a suit for contempt.

The court has thus described a contempt application by the Democratic Accountability lab, led by counsel Oliver Barker Vormawor against the Commissioner-General of the GRA  as ineffective, frivolous, vexatious and dismissed the same.

The group invoked the jurisdiction of the apex court citing the GRA Commissioner-General and the Ghana Revenue Authority for contempt for going ahead to begin the collection of the E-levy on May 1, 2022 despite the pendency of an injunction suit at that time.

When the case was called, the Supreme Court panel presided over by Justice Nene Amegatcher was particularly interested in knowing the applicant's locus standi especially having to do with a suit that they are not a party to.

The court took notice of the wrong titling of the application as well as solicited from counsel Barker, the Authority which vests his client(3rd party) the power to cite the Commissioner General and a whole institution (GRA) for contempt.

At this point, counsel Oliver Barker in seeking to make a case and solidify his stance noted that his client was invoking the court's jurisdiction pursuant to Article 126(2) of the Constitution, 1992.

After several rounds of questioning by the Bench relative to the case laws that informed such an action by the applicant, the court made a decision.

RULING
The court noted that the applicant has no locus standi in instituting the action for contempt against the parties.

Also, it described the application as ineffective, frivolous, vexatious, and dismissed the same.

Further to the above, cost of Ghc10,000 was awarded against the applicant's counsel, Oliver Barker Vormawor to be paid directly by him for the applicant.

Background

Following the passage of the E-levy by Parliament in March, The Minority leader in parliament, Haruna Iddrisu, and 2 other Minority MPs, Mahama Ayariga and Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa filed a suit at the Supreme Court invoking its original jurisdiction seeking inter alia a declaration that the purported vote on the motion for the second reading of the Electronic Levy Transfer Bill, 2021 by the 136 Majority MPs is in contravention of Article 104(1) thus unconstitutional, null, void and of no effect.

The trio later filed an interlocutory injunction, seeking to restrain the GRA from moving ahead with the tax implementation. 

It was their case that “millions of people will suffer irreparable harm if the Court nullifies the passage of the Electronic Transfer Levy Act, 2022(Act 1075).” And that also, the GRA would be unable to reimburse the millions of Ghanaians who would have paid the E-levy if it's nullified.

 However on May 4, 2022, in a unanimous decision, the bench of justices at the Supreme Court dismissed the injunction application on about five grounds. 

The Court further ordered GRA to ensure that it keeps adequate records of the tax deducted to enable possible refunds should the substantive matter succeed.