[2002]DLCA1151 • November 22, 2002 • Court of Appeal
ABODAKPI AND ANOTHER vs. THE REPUBLIC
The applicant, one of two accused persons jointly charged and tried summarily in the Fast Track High Court, objected to the mode of trial, arguing that due to the complexity of the charges, involvement of multiple witnesses, and potential maximum sentence of 25 years, the trial should be on indictment rather than summary. The applicant filed an interlocutory appeal against the refusal of the trial court to stay proceedings and change the mode of trial.
read moreJUDGEMENT Omari-Sasu JA. We yesterday dismissed the application for stay of proceedings made by the first accused-appellant-applicant (hereinafter referred to as the applicant) and reserved the reasons to be read today. We now proceed to deal with the said reasons as follows. This is a repetition of an application by the applicant for stay of proceedings in the Fast Track High Court being presided over by our brother Farkye JA—sitting as an additional High Court judge pending the determination of the applicant’s Interlocutory appeal against the ruling of our said brother who has refused to stay his proceedings. The appellant brings his application under rule 27A of the Court of Appeal (Amendment) Rules, 1998 (CI 21) which provides: “The Court may in any interlocutory appeal, civil or criminal before it, grant stay of proceedings pending the determination of the interlocutory appeal subject to such terms as the Court considers fit.” (The emphasis is ours.) Section 27...