[1868]DLHC15165March 29, 1968High Court

AKAINYAH vs. THE REPUBLIC

The proceedings were brought under the Corrupt Practices Prevention Act, 1964 (Act 230), following adverse findings made by a commission of inquiry appointed by E.I. 93 of 1966 to investigate corruption and malpractices in the grant of import licences during the relevant period. The first accused, Mrs. Akainyah, was charged on thirteen counts including accepting bribes to influence a public officer, offering to accept bribes, offering to give bribes, conspiracy to extort, conspiracy to commit corruption, and conspiracy to commit wilful oppression. The second accused was charged on two counts of offering to give bribe to influence a public officer and abetment of accepting bribe. The prosecution relied on the commission’s report as prima facie evidence under section 5(2) of Act 230. The accused were called upon to show cause why they should not be sentenced according to law. The court reviewed the findings in the report and the explanations offered by the accused, and held that the first accused failed to displace the statutory presumption arising from the adverse findings, while the second accused’s evidence amounted only to mitigation. Portion of judgment: opening paragraphs setting out E.I. 93, the charges, exhibit A, and the court’s construction of sections 5 and 6 of Act 230; pp. 334-352.

read more

JUDGMENT OF AZU CRABBE J. A. The proceedings in this case have been brought under the Corrupt Practices (Prevention) Act, 1964 (Act 230), (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and the two accused are persons against whom adverse findings have been made by the commission appointed under the Act. Ollennu J.S.C. (as he then was), was appointed sole commissioner by the Corrupt Practices (Prevention) (Appointment of Commission) Instrument, 1966 (E.I. 93), dated 5 March 1966, and in view of the submissions by counsel for the first accused, when putting forward matters upon which his client [p.334] relies in showing cause, I think I ought to reproduce the full terms of E.I. 93. The instrument reads: “EXECUTIVE INSTRUMENT E.I. 93. CORRUPT PRACTICES (PREVENTION) (APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSION) INSTRUMENT, 1966 WHEREAS reports have been received by the National Liberation Council alleging corruption in connection with the grant of certain import licences; NOW THEREFORE in exercise of the p.....