Ampomah is seeking to invoke the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to declare that Sections 74(1)(b) of CAP 127 and Sections262, 263, 264, and 265(2) of Act 29 breach Articles 17(2) and 21(1) ( c) of the Constitution by limiting men to only one wife even if they wish to have more.
But in its Statement of Defense to the case, the Attorney General said that the plaintiff simply misunderstood part 3 of the Marriages Act (CAP 127).
The AG, in a 23-page document signed by Chief State Attorney, Patience Adumua-Lartey explains that “the various forms of marriage as captured by CAP 127 are simply based on the principles of the various religions regarding marriage and not a creation of the lawmakers.
“It added that section 74 of CAP 127 is clear, concise, and admits of no ambiguity and that what CAP 127 did was just give legal backing to the areligious principle which has been in existence since time immemorial.
“Further, it submits that considering the reliefs sought in the plaintiff’s action, it is clear that this is not a case that calls for interpretation of the Constitution to vest the Supreme Court with the appropriate jurisdiction per Article 130(1) (a).
“The AG further responds that marriage under the ordinance is essentially distinct from Christian marriage as stated on the RGD website; ‘Marriage under Ordinance is the Civil Union available to any Ghanaian to take advantage of, and despite some confusion, it is entirely secular and not religious (Christian) at all’” the AG’s Statement of Defense said, as reported by dennislawnews.com.
The Attorney General is therefore asking the Supreme Court to throw out the case, saying it is an abuse of the court’s processes.