Continental Commodities and Services Company Limited V The Attorney General and Minister of Justice (7 of 2004) [2006] SLCA 4 (17 March 2006)

CIV.APP.7/2004 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR SIERRA LEONE BETWEEN: CONTINENTAL COMMODITIES AND SERVICES COMPANY LIMITED ~ APPELLANT AND THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE ~ RESPONDENT

Coram

Hon. Justice Sir John Muria JA (Presiding) Hon. Justice A.N.B. Stronge JA Hon. Justice UH. Tejan-JaliohJA HEARING: 2 November 2005 ; JUDGMENT: 17 March 2006 Advocates: : AF. Serry-Kamal Esq, for the Appellant E. Roberts Esq. for the Respondent;

Judgment

Delivered this (7% day ot Méie& 2006 sh, . MURIA JA: “Where a Commission of Inquiry makes an adverse finding against any person, which may result in a penalty, forfelture or loss of status, the report of the Commission of Inquiry shall, for the Purposes of this Constitution, be deemed to be a judgment of the High Court of Justice and accordingly an appeal shall be as of right from the Commission to the Court of Appeal.” (Section 149(4), Constitution). Itis the interpretation of this provision of the Constitution that is central to the determination of this appeal

Backaround To appreciate the nature of the appeal, let me set out the brief background to this case. Following complaints of irregularities over the allocation and disposition, and encroachment of both private and State lands, the Government set up a Commission of Inquiry (Cl), with the following terms of reference —

() Toenquire and make appropriate recommendations on the present laws relating to the allocation and use of state lands.

(i) To examine the extent of state land granted or leased with a view to finding out lapses in the procedure relating to the appropriation of state land.

(ii) To ascertain whether there are any persons or organizations in

: possession of any state lands without proper grant or authorization. F (iv) To determine the extent of compliance by the grantee of state lands with the conditions of his or her grant.

(V) To examine the extent of environmental degradation that has occurred as a result of the granting and leasing of state lands.

(vi) To ensure that in carrying out this exercise consideration will be given to the recent report of the National Commission for Unity and Reconciliation (NCUR) in so far as it relates to the granting and leasing of state lands.

(vil) To investigate the possibilty of transferring the administration of state lands to local authorities.

(vill) To make appropriate recommendation to arrest the lapses brought about in fine with the findings.

i The Commissioner, Hon. Justice Marcus-Jones, was appointed by His Excellency the President on 27" October 1998 and soon thereafter conducted the Commission of Inquiry. Despite the set back in its work due to the rebel invasion of Freetown in January 1999, the Commission concluded its work ancl Published its findings and recommendations in its “Report on the Mrs, Justice, Laura Marcus-Jones Commission of Inquiry on the Leasing and Sale of State Lands in the Western Area, 1999". A Government White Paper (GWP) was, subsequently prepared as a result of the Report of the COI. The Government White Paper was published in October 2000, more than six months after the Commission of Inquiry Report was presented to His Excellency, The President. High Court Following the publication of the Commission of Inquiry Report, and more particularly, the Government White Paper, the respondent instituted proceedings . by way of an Originating Notice of Motion in the High Court to set aside the sale and purchase of the land at 28 Wallace Johnson Street, Freetown and to cancel ‘ the Deed of Conveyance over the said properly made between the Government of Sierra Leone and the appellant on 16" September 1993 and take possession of the said property. The High Court heard the application and granted the order setting aside the transaction leading to the sale and purchase of the Government property at 28 Wallace Johnson Street and canceling the granlDeed of Conveyance made between the parties over the said property. Court of Appeal The appellant, being aggrieved by the High Court's decision appealed to Court of Appeal on four grounds, namely: 1, The whole proceedings were null and void and in that the Respondent herein proceeded by Originating process which was ab initio void

2. The learned trial Judge misdirected himself when he held that he could not interfere with the process by which the decision was arrived at since itis deemed to be a judgment.

3. The learned trial Judge erred in law in that having found that thera was no express forfeiture, granted the orders prayed for in the motion,

4, The decision is against the weight of the evidence.

As it will become apparent, the grounds of appeal raise both procedural as well 28 substantive issues of law. For the purpose of dealing with the issues raised, it will be convenient to deal with ground two of the appeal first. : The contention by Mr. Serry-Kamal of Counsel for the appellant is that the . Commission of Inquiry Report made no “adverse finding” against the appellant. Consequently the appeliant saw no need to exercise his right of appeal; and did ‘not do so, against the Commission's findings. The adverse comments were raised in the Government White Paper and Mr. Serry-Kamal conceded that Counsel, however, argued that the Government White Paper was not a Report of the Commission of Inquiry under Section 149 of the Constitution and could not be deemed to be a High Court judgment under subsection (4) of Section 149 of the Constitution. Mr. Roberts of Counsel for the respondent was adamant that the Commission of Inquiry Report made an adverse finding against the appellant, referring to page 116 of the Record of Appeal where it is stated: “The internal working of the Ministry is not healthy either. Allocation of State Land to Applicants is not always equitable. Procedures used could vary with applicants. The Commission looked at the File of Continental Commodities and Services Limited, File No. SLD10/64 Vol.6T

The pages read for this report end here. The judgment continues in the PDF.