Private legal practitioner Alex Dodoo has sued the Ghana Standards Authority (GSA) at the High Court, challenging the legality of its planned enforcement of national vehicle standards and seeking an order restraining the Authority from implementing the requirements contained in two public notices issued in August 2026.
In his Statement of Claim, Lawyer Dodoo argues that the Authority cannot lawfully treat the National Vehicle Standards as mandatory when, according to him, the standards have not been formally declared mandatory in accordance with the law.
The dispute centres on public notices issued by the GSA on August 3 and August 14, 2026, announcing measures under the National Vehicle Homologation and Conformity Assessment programme and the administrative framework for enforcing national vehicle standards from October 1, 2026.
Under the measures outlined in the notices, vehicle manufacturers and assemblers, as well as importers, distributors and dealers of used vehicles, were required to register with the Authority. New vehicle models were also required to undergo homologation, while used vehicles that failed to meet the prescribed requirements would not be permitted entry into Ghana.
The August 14 notice further identified categories of used vehicles that would be prohibited from importation. These included flood-damaged vehicles, vehicles damaged by fire, vehicles with damaged chassis or safety cages, vehicles assembled from spare parts, vehicles without speedometer readings in kilometres per hour, and vehicles more than 15 years old.
The plaintiff also challenges the requirement that used vehicles be inspected in their country of origin by a third-party inspection body approved by the GSA, with a Certificate of Conformance issued.
Why the Plaintiff is Challenging the Measures
Dodoo’s principal argument is that the GSA’s authority to prohibit the importation of goods depends on whether those goods fail to conform to applicable mandatory standards or whether a statute otherwise authorises the prohibition.
He contends that, as at the commencement of the action, the National Vehicle Standards had not been declared mandatory and that no relevant law or instrument had conferred that status on them.
According to the plaintiff, the power to declare a standard mandatory rests with the Minister responsible for Trade, Agribusiness and Industry. He further argues that no notice declaring the National Vehicle Standards mandatory had been published in the Gazette, as required by law.
On that basis, Dodoo maintains that the GSA’s attempt to enforce the standards as mandatory amounts to an unlawful exercise of power and an encroachment on the Minister’s statutory authority. He argues that unless the High Court intervenes, the Authority will continue to act contrary to law.
Reliefs Sought by the Plaintiff
The plaintiff is asking the High Court for three substantive forms of relief, in addition to costs.
First, he wants a declaration of illegality. He is asking the court to declare that the strict enforcement of the National Vehicle Standards, insofar as it prohibits the importation of used vehicles under the measures announced by the GSA, is contrary to law and unlawful.
Such a declaration would address the legal validity of the enforcement challenged in the suit.
Second, he wants an injunction against the GSA. He is asking the court to restrain the Authority from enforcing the National Vehicle Standards as set out in the public notices dated August 3 and August 14, 2026.
An injunction would be the direct remedy sought to prevent the Authority from continuing the challenged enforcement, subject to the terms of any order the court might ultimately make.
Third, he wants any further orders the court considers appropriate. The plaintiff has also invited the court to make any additional orders or directions it considers just, equitable and necessary. He is also claiming costs.
The suit therefore places before the court a question about the legal authority under which the GSA seeks to enforce the vehicle standards, particularly whether the standards can be treated as mandatory without the formal declaration the plaintiff says the law requires.
The claims remain the plaintiff’s case, and the court’s determination of the issues will establish whether the challenged measures are legally sustainable.
