Lardan v Attorney-General (Nos 1 and 2)

• Jurisdiction: Ghana
• Date: 25 October 1957
• Court: High Court (Ghana)

Ghana, Ashanti Divisional Court.

(Smith J.)

Lardan

and

Attorney-General and Others (No. 1).

Lardan

and

Attorney-General and Others (No. 2).

Nationality In general Proof of nationality Deportation order issued in respect of alien claiming to be a national of deporting State Procedure for establishing national status Subsequent legislation providing for deportation of named person Whether his citizenship of deporting State relevant Whether sovereign Parliament may legislate in denial of citizen's right to live in country of his nationality The law of Ghana.

Aliens Expulsion of Person claiming not to be alien Procedure for determining alien or national status when deportation order already issued The law of Ghana.

International law in general Relation to municipal law Power to legislate for the peace, order and good government of Ghana Whether excluding power to legislate in contravention of international law The law of Ghana.

The Facts.The Ghana Deportation Act, 1957, provided for the deportation of aliens. A deportation order under s. 4 (1) (c) of the Act was made against the applicant, Lardan. He filed a writ seeking a declaratory order to the effect that he was a Ghanaian citizen and thus not within the ambit of the Act, and also an injunction against his deportation. In support, he submitted an affidavit dealing with his place of birth and that of his mother, claiming both to be in Ghana. An interim injunction for one week was granted, the Court clearly stating that a deportation order under s. 4 (1) (c) was entirely within the power of the Governor General and could not be questioned, provided that the person concerned was an alien. At the hearing to determine whether the interim injunction should be discharged,

Held: that the injunction must be discharged. In the absence of sufficient evidence in support of an assertion of citizenship, there was no justification for continuing an injunction against deportation made under legislative powers limited to aliens.

The Court said: The onus of proving that he is a Ghana citizen is under the Act cast entirely on the person claiming that status. I do not agree that the wording of section 3 presupposes that an investigation of fact must take the form of a trial based on an ordinary writ and following out the procedure of an ordinary civil action.

I deal now with the interlocutory injunction made on the plaintiff's claim. The affidavit of the plaintiff merely states that he was born in Kumasi and his mother (unnamed) in Krachi. In dealing with the motion on July 31, I bore in mind that there was little or no time for further affidavits and evidence to be obtained. Nor in the circumstances do I attach any real importance to certain technical omissions in the affidavit pointed out by Mr. Bing. Nothing more, however, was...