Adoa News Adoa News
A legal practitioner, Jonathan A. Alua, has invoked the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to challenge the Ghana Revenue Authority’s (GRA) power to determine the quantity of passenger baggage eligible for exemptions from customs duties and taxes.
Mr Alua has sued the Attorney-General and the Commissioner-General of the GRA over Regulation 18(2)(b) of the Exemptions Regulations, 2025 (L.I. 2514), arguing that the provision is inconsistent with the 1992 Constitution.
The plaintiff contends that the regulation effectively gives the GRA Commissioner-General the authority to waive or vary taxes without first obtaining approval from Parliament.
His case is anchored on Article 174(2) of the Constitution, which requires prior parliamentary approval for any waiver or variation of a tax in favour of an individual or authority.
According to Mr Alua, the authority granted under Regulation 18(2)(b) to determine the quantity of passenger baggage that may be exempted from customs duties and taxes amounts to the exercise of a constitutional taxing power.
He is therefore asking the Supreme Court to declare the provision unconstitutional to the extent that it allows the Commissioner-General or officers of the Customs Division to approve or reject baggage exemptions on a case-by-case basis without prior parliamentary approval.
Mr Alua is also seeking an order preventing the GRA from exercising the disputed power until the requirements of Article 174(2) have been fulfilled, or Parliament has passed a resolution under Article 174(3) exempting the exercise of the power from that requirement.
In addition, the lawyer wants the Court to issue any further orders it considers appropriate to give effect to the declarations being sought.
He is also seeking costs in the case.
The Attorney-General and the GRA have been directed to file their respective statements of case within 14 days of being served with the plaintiff’s statement of case.