Jabbie v Sierra Leone People's Party v 3 others (SC MISC APP 1 of 2011) [2011] SLSC 1 (28 February 2011)

I S,C. MISC. APP. NO. X/2011 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SIERRA LEONE IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION IN RESPECT OF THE SIERRA LEONE PEOPLES PARTY (HEREIN ALSO CALLED THE “SLPP” OR “PARTY”) PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 122, 124(l)(a), 127 AND 171(15) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF SIERRA LEONE ACT. NO 6 OF 1991 (HEREIN ALSO CALLED “THE NATIONAL CONSTITUTION”) TOGETHER WITH RULES 89 TO 98 INCLUSIVE OF THE SUPREME COURT RULES, STATUTORY INSTRUMENT NO.l OF 1982. THE MATTER OF SECTIONS 34, 35(1), 35(2), 35(6), 35(8), 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, AND 64(1) OF THE NATIONAL CONSTITUTION IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 6, 11, 12, 24, 26, 27 AND 29 OF THE POLITICAL PARTIES ACT. NO.3 OF 2002. IN THE MATTER OF CLAUSES 1, 2, 4, 5, 6(c) AND 6(d) AND 10 OF THE 1995 SLPP CONSTITUTION (AS AMENDED) (HEREIN ALSO CALLED “THE PARTY CONSTITUTION”) AND ALSO OF THE EMERGENCY PARTY CONFERENCE OF THE SLPP HELD ON 29T H JANUARY 2011 AT BO IN THE SOUTHERN PROVINCE BETWEEN: DR. BU-BUAKIE JABBI - PLAINTIFF (SLPP 2012 FLAGBEARER ASPIRANT) AND THE SIERRA LEONE PEOPLE’S PARTY (SLPP) - 1 s t DEFENDANT JOHN OPONJO BENJAMIN (AS NATIONAL CHAIRMAN AND LEADER OF SLPP ) - 2 n d DEFENDANT l 2 . JACOB JUSU SAFFA (AS NATIONAL SECRETARY-GENERAL OF SLPP) - 3*° DEFENDANT ALEX MUGBE MUSA (AS NATIONAL EXECUTIVE LEGAL ADVISER OF SLPP) - 4 th DEFENDANT CORAM: HON. JUSTICE U.H. TEJAN-JALLOH - CJ - (PRESIDING) HON. JUSTICE S. BASH-TAQI - JSC HON. JUSTICE P.O. HAMILTON - JSC HON. JUSTICE V.A.D. WRIGHT - JSC HON. JUSTICE M.E.T, THOMPSON - JSC DR. BUBUAKIE JABBI PLAINTIFF-IN-PERSON E.A. HALLOWAY ESQ., TEJAN-JALLOH ESQ., S.B. TEJAN-SIE ESQ., A.B. LANSANA ESQ., E.N.B. NGUAKUI ESQ., NGAVAO ESQ., M.I. KANU ESQ., S.S. THOMAS ESQ., U. KOROMA ESQ., S. JAMIRU ESQ., FOR THE DEFENDANTS. RULING DELIVERED ON 28 t h DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2011 HON. CHIEF JUSTICE iji the Interlocutory Notice of Motion dated 17th February, 2011, Dr. BuBuakie Jabbi, the Plaintiff herein applied to be heard on Wednesday 23r d February, 2011 for an interim injunction. On the 23r d February, 2011 by a Notice of Intention to rely on a preliminary objection, the 1st, 2n d , 3r d and 4th Defendants indicated their intention to rely upon certain preliminary objections at the hearing of the aforesaid Interlocutory Notice of Motion dated 17th February, 2011, to wit, lack of jurisdiction of the Court to hear and Locus Standi of the Plaintiff to move the Interlocutory and Originating 2 ■ -II ■ ■ 3 Notice of Motion dated 17th Februaiy, 2011 and the 11th February, 2011 respectively and filed herein. As jurisdiction of the Court and Locus Standi are of paramount importance and preliminary objection could be raised at any time before the hearing of any proceedings, we agreed to hear submissions on the matter. On Friday 25th Februaiy, 2011, Mr. Halloway Esq. of Counsel for the Defendants and the Plaintiff addressed us on both issues. Mr, E.A. Halloway Esq. of Counsel for the Defendants submitted that the Court, i.e. the Supreme Court, lacks original jurisdiction to entertain the Interlocutory Notice of Motion, secondly, that the Plaintiff Dr. Bu-Buakie Jabbi, has nc Locus Standi to invoke the Supreme Court in its original jurisdiction to make the 1st, and 2n d Declarations. In support D f his contentions he refers the Court to Section 6 of the Political Parties Act. 2001, Section 35(1), and Section 127 of the Sieira Leone Constitution Act No.6 of 1991 (hereinafter referred to as “The National Constitution”). He also cites the Supreme Court decisions in the case of Hinga Norman and Others vs. SLPP -SC. 2/2005 (unreported) and Hinga Norman & Sama Banya & Others vs. SLPP - SC. 3/2005 (unreported). Or. Bu-Buakie Jabbi in reply submitted that the Court has jurisdiction to entertain the Interlocutory Notice o f Motion in that the Defendants have failed to comply with the National Constitution. As regards his capacity or standing to institute the action, he submitted that he had the capacity to do so. He referred the Court to Sections 35(2), 35(6), 124, 127, 171(15) of the National Constitution Act. No. 6 of 1991. He also relied on the decision of i iiinga Norman & Others supra. We have considered the submission of both sides, and have come to the conclusion that the objection is untenable and is accordingly overruled. Reasons for overruling the objection will be given later. HCm. fySTICE U.H. TEJAN-JALLOH - CJ - (PRESIDING) ........ HON. JUSTICE S. B&SH TAQI - JSC HON. JUSTICE P.O. HAMILTON - JSC HON. JUSTICE'V.,A. D. WRIGHT - JSC ........ HON. JUSTICE M.E.T. THOMPSON - JSC CERTJFIEP X^UE COPY R EG »R A^§UPR EM E COURT