Sarkodie storms Supreme Court to fight FDA
Michael Owusu Addo, better known by his stage name Sarkodie, is a well-known hip-hop singer. He appeared in the Supreme Court today in a case contesting an FDA regulation that forbade the use of famous people or celebrities in advertisements for alcoholic beverages.
Boakyewaa Lawrencia 
Mark Darlington Osae, manager of hip-hop artists Skrewfaze and Reggie "N" Bollie, filed the lawsuit.
According to the lawsuit, the FDA guidance breached the right against discrimination protected by Article 17 of the 1992 Constitution, making it unlawful.
The Constitution's Article 17(1) declares that everyone is equal before the law, while Article 17(2) prohibits discrimination based on gender, race, color, ethnic origin, religion, creed or social or economic status”.
Adjournment
The case was postponed until January 17 and was scheduled to be heard by a seven-member panel of the supreme court today.
Sarkodie was in court with Bobby Banson, the plaintiff's attorney.
Ban
Guideline 3.2.10 of Guidelines for the Advertisement of Foods was published by the FDA on February 1, 2016.
It states that "No well-known personality or professional shall be used in alcoholic beverage advertising".
The FDA contended that the guideline was necessary to stop minors being hooked to alcohol due to the influence of celebrities.
In November last year, Mr Osae, who is also the Chairman and Co-Founder of Ghana Music Alliance, dragged the FDA and the Attorney General to the apex court.
He is seeking a declaration that “ on a true and proper interpretation of Article 17(1) and (2) which guarantee equality before the law and prohibits discrimination against persons on grounds of social or economic status, occupation, among others, Guideline 3.2.10 of the Guidelines for the Advertisement of Foods published by the 1st Defendant on 1st February 2016 which provides that "No well-known personality or professional shall be used in alcoholic beverage advertising" is discriminatory, inconsistent with and in contravention of articles 17(1) and 17
(2) of the 1992 Constitution, and thus unconstitutional.
A declaration that "on a true and proper interpretation of Article 17(1) and (2), Guidelines for the Advertisement of Foods, published by the First Defendant on 1st February 2016, prohibiting well-known personalities and professionals from advertising alcoholic products is inconsistent with and in contravention of articles 17(1) and 17 (2) of the 1992 Constitution, which guarantee equality before the law and prohibit discrimination against persons on grounds of social or economic status, occupation, among other things, and consequently null, void, and unenforceable" is another request he is making of the Supreme Court. That ruling is also requested.
Additionally, he is asking for "an order striking down Guidelines for the Advertisement of foods, published by the First Defendant on February 1, 2016, as being nullity and inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the 1992 Constitution."
