THE REPUBLIC vs. STEPHEN KWABENA OPUNI & 2 ORS.

The respondents were standing trial in the High Court, Accra, in a high-profile criminal prosecution involving allegations including defrauding by false pretence, conspiracy to cause financial loss to the State, wilfully causing financial loss to the State, corruption by a public officer, contravention of the Public Procurement Act, and offences under the Plants and Fertilizer Act, 2010 (Act 803). The trial commenced in 2018 before Honyenuga JSC sitting as an additional High Court judge. By March 2021, the prosecution had closed its case; a submission of no case was partly rejected on 7 May 2021; and the 1st respondent had opened his defence and called seven witnesses. While the 7th defence witness was still under cross-examination, Honyenuga JSC retired. The Chief Justice reassigned the case to K. A. Gyimah J. The prosecution then orally applied for the prior proceedings to be adopted so the trial could continue from where it had ended. The respondents opposed the application, and the High Court ordered a trial de novo. The Republic appealed. Portion of judgment pointing to this: “It is common knowledge that trial of the instant case commenced in 2018 and by March 2021 the prosecution has closed its case… the 1st respondent opened his defence on 02/12/2021 and has so far invited 7 witnesses to testify for him… whilst the 7th witness… was still in the witness box… Honyenuga JSC attained the retiring age of 70 years… the Chief Justice subsequently on 20/03/2023, did transfer the matter to K. A Gyimah J…”

JUDGMENT BRIGHT MENSAH JA: My Lords, this appeal is in a very narrow compass, bordering on interference with tile exercise of judicial discretion. On the 4th April 2023, the High Court, Accra in a ruling declined an invitation by the Prosecution to adopt for the continuation for trial, the proceedings so far conducted in the instant case. It is noted for the record that the trial of the case was from the outset entrusted to Honyenuga JSC sitting as an additional Justice of the High Court. It is material to state that Honyenuga JSC proceeded on retirement from active service sometime this year, as a result of which the proceedings in the case stalled. Pursuant to an order under the hand of the Chief Justice, the matter was put before K. A Gyimah J, to be dealt with in accordance with law. The case having been put before the court differently constituted, the critical question that arose for consideration and determination was whether the proceedings initially held before Hon...