The Supreme Court has set July 31 to rule on an application filed by the Attorney General asking the justices to quash a decision by a High Court in a case between the mining company, Exton Cubic and the state.
The motion filed ex-parte by the Deputy Attorney General Godfred Dame says the ruling by High Court presided over by Justice Ackaah Boafo in the case could undermine efficient administration of justice.
He said the company breached several processes in its acquisition of a mining license, a situation that makes it impossible for Exton Cubic to be deemed to have a “mining right as required by law.”
Arguing their case before the Supereme Court on Wednesday, Mr Dame said the proceedings of the high court was in violation of Act 703 section 27(1), saying the act sets out the mandatory procedure for mining rights.
He said the further grant by the Judge to quash the letter written by the Minister was an error.
He, therefore, prayed the Supreme Court to intervene and quash the ruling of the High Court since the court even lacked jurisdiction to enforce or protect a right which Exton Cubic did not have.
He said the wrongful assumption of jurisdiction of the court by the judge is also in violation of Act 703.
Mr Osafo Boabeng, Counsel for the interested party, said they were opposed to the application and have filed an affidavit in opposition to that effect.
He said the applicant has not been able to situate herself within any of the sections in Act 703, for section 27 to be invoked.
He prayed the court to dismiss the application since no proper grounds of certiorari has been canvassed before the court, saying alternatively, the issue of Act 268(1) was hanging.
The seven-member panel of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice Julius Ansah, then adjourned the matter to July 31, for ruling.
Earlier this year, Exton Cubic proceeded to the High court challenging the power of the Minister to revoke three licenses it received to prospect for bauxite during the tenure of the Mahama-led administration.
The company in part accused the Minister of being arbitrary and asked the court to set aside the decision by the Minister to revoke its mining licenses.
The presiding judge in his ruling quashed the letter written by the Minister.