A Ghanaian legal practitioner, Jonathan Abotiwine Alua, has invoked the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutional basis of a provision that gives the Commissioner-General of the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA) power to determine the quantity of passenger baggage exempt from customs duties and taxes.
The action, filed against the Attorney-General and the Commissioner-General of the GRA, seeks declarations on the interpretation and application of Article 174 of the 1992 Constitution in relation to Regulation 18(2)(b) of the Exemptions Regulations, 2025 (L.I. 2514).
Mr Alua is asking the Supreme Court to determine whether the power granted to the Commissioner-General under the regulation amounts to a power to waive or vary taxes in favour of individual persons or authorities.
According to the writ, such a power, if it amounts to a tax waiver or variation, must be subjected to prior approval by Parliament through a resolution as required under Article 174(2) of the Constitution.
The plaintiff argues that Regulation 18(2)(b), made pursuant to Section 17(3) of the Exemptions Act, 2022 (Act 1083), empowers the Commissioner-General or authorised Customs officers to determine, on a case-by-case basis, whether individual passengers qualify for the baggage exemption provided under Section 17(1) of the Act.
Mr Alua contends that the exercise of that discretion without prior parliamentary approval is inconsistent with the Constitution.
He is therefore asking the Supreme Court to declare that, to the extent that Regulation 18(2)(b) permits the Commissioner-General or Customs officers to grant or withhold the exemption on an individualised basis without prior parliamentary approval, the regulation is inconsistent with and void under Article 1(2) of the Constitution.
The plaintiff is also seeking an order restraining the Commissioner-General and the Customs Division from exercising the disputed power to grant or refuse the exemption on a case-by-case basis until the constitutional requirements under Article 174(2) have been satisfied.
Alternatively, he wants Parliament to have the opportunity to pass a resolution under Article 174(3) exempting the exercise of the power from the requirements of Article 174(2).
Mr Alua is further asking the Supreme Court to issue any additional orders it considers necessary to give effect to the declarations sought, as well as an award of costs.
Constitutional challenge
The plaintiff says he is bringing the action as a Ghanaian citizen and legal practitioner under Article 2 of the 1992 Constitution.
Article 2 gives citizens the right to invoke the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court where they allege that an enactment, or anything done under the authority of an enactment, is inconsistent with or in contravention of a provision of the Constitution.
The case places before the apex court questions concerning the limits of administrative discretion in granting tax exemptions and the constitutional role of Parliament in approving tax waivers and variations.
The writ was dated September 4, 2026, and filed at the Supreme Court in Accra.
The defendants have been directed to file their respective statements of case within 14 days after service of the plaintiff’s statement of case, in accordance with the writ.
Source: www.kumasimail.com
