AWUNI V WEST AFRICAN EXAMINATIONS COUNCIL-NATURAL JUSTICE

In this case the plaintiff applicant and others, Awuni were registered and sat for the
SSSCE for the year 2000 which were organised and conducted by the Respondent,
WAEC. After the exams, WAEC in a letter to the headmaster of Notre Dame SSS,
contended that there was foreknowledge and collusion among the Awuni and others
from the Notre Dame SSS in Mathematics (Core) Paper 2. The council therefore
cancelled the entire results of the applicant, banned the applicant and others from
taking any examinations conducted by the council for 3years and refused to release the
entire results of the applicant and others. The headmaster upon receiving this letter,
wrote a petition to the WAEC and prayed for a review and reconsideration of the
decision. In their reply, WAEC maintained their stance. Awuni was unhappy and
consulted solicitors in Accra to threatened legal action if the WAEC did not respond
favourably to the plight of the applicant within one week. Awuni argued that none of
them was ever questioned, cautioned, reprimanded or interrogated by any agents of
the respondents either before, during or after writing the said examinations in respect
of any of them having had foreknowledge of any of the examination questions or as
having acted in collusion with any person(s) in writing the said examination. The case
for WAEC is that the respondents per article 14 of the convention establishing the West
African Examinations Council, which is annexed to the West African Examinations
Council Law, 1991 (PNDCL 255) it is an international examining body set up by
convention and law to conduct examinations in West African sub-region, has rules and
regulations to ensure the sanctity of examinations and stem out examination
malpractices in the public interest.

The applicants brought this application under articles 33(1) and 23 of the Constitution,
1992 of the Republic of Ghana.

ISSUES

1. Whether or not the cancellation of the entire results of the applicant and others in
the SSSCE for the year 2000 is unlawful, null, void and of no effect.

2. Whether or not the barring of the applicant and others for three years from taking
any examinations conducted by the respondents is unlawful, null, void and of no effect.

3. Whether or not the refusal or neglect of the WAEC to release the entire results of the
applicant and others is unlawful, null, void and of no effect.
4. Whether or not there was an infringement of the fundamental human rights and
freedom of the applicant and others.

RULING/ REASONING

1. Per Dr Bentley’s case in R v University of Cambridge if God almighty gives notice

before he punishes, how much more should we mortals deny our citizens the
same? It is my considered view, therefore, that the respondents herein have
acted in open defiance of the duty to act fairly and reasonably imposed on
administrative bodies and officials by article 23 of our Constitution, 1992. The
applicants were never accused or charged. Kelly CB in the case of Wood v Woad
(1723) stated that, “The rule expressed in audi alteram partem is not confined to
the conduct of strictly legal tribunals, but is applicable to every individual or body
or persons invested with authority to adjudicate upon matter involving civil
consequences to individuals”. Therefore, when WAE were investigating the
allegation of foreknowledge and collusion, the applicants or their headmaster
should have been heard and given chance to be examined. The respondents are
guilty of abnegation of a constitutional mandatory duty to act fairly and
reasonably in this case. And I accordingly declare that the decision which the
respondents arrived at concerning the applicants is incurably bad, void and of no
consequence. Consequential orders.

(1) WEAC ordered to publish the results of the applicants in all the papers

(2) Lift the ban imposed on the applicants

(3) By and under article 14 of the convention establishing the WAEC, which is annexed
to the WAEC Law, 1991 (PNDCL 255) the Republic of Ghana as a member country was
mandated to enact laws incorporating the convention and also enact laws dealing with
fraud, forgery and kindred offences including offences, against malpractice in
examination and relating to awards of certificates and diplomas, and I take judicial
notice that PNDCL 255 was enacted pursuant to the said convention, however this law
in section 12 thereof gave power to the Secretary and Minister for Education to make
regulations and legislative instrument to give full effect to the provisions of PNDCL 255.
This power has not been executed since 1991 when PNDCL 255 was enacted.

(5) Copies of this decision are to be sent to AG and the Minister for Education.