LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – Reference to Supreme Court under Section 259(3) – Scope
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A question referred to the Supreme Court by the Court of Appeal under section 259(3) of the 1979 Constitution must be a question as to the interpretation or application of the Constitution; a question which does not involve constitutional interpretation or application is incompetent for reference under the subsection.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"A question referred to the Supreme Court by the Court of Appeal under section 259(3) of the 1979 Constitution must be a question as to the interpretation or application of the Constitution. A question which does not involve the interpretation or application of any provision of the Constitution is incompetent for reference under the subsection."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Section 259(3) creates a special reference procedure for constitutional questions arising in the Court of Appeal. Only genuine constitutional interpretation or application questions qualify: how should a constitutional provision be construed? does this situation fall within a constitutional provision’s scope? The reference must involve actual constitutional provisions, not: statutory interpretation, common law questions, or factual disputes lacking constitutional dimensions. This narrow scope ensures: Supreme Court resources focus on important constitutional issues; references aren’t used to bypass normal appeal procedures; constitutional jurisdiction isn’t expanded through inappropriate references. Courts scrutinize references to ensure they raise true constitutional questions. Questions disguised as constitutional but actually involving statute interpretation or factual issues are incompetent and should be rejected