REPUBLIC vs. DIRECTOR OF PRISONS; EX PARTE ALLOTEY & ANOTHER [1973]DLHC2259

Date	1973-09-20
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1973]DLHC2259

APALOO AG.C.J.

AMOFAH FOR THE APPLICANTS.

KALEO BIO SENIOR STATE ATTORNEY WITH HIM MISS AMPOFO ANTI ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1973]DLHC2259
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" >REPUBLIC <o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;DIRECTOR OF PRISONS; EX PARTE
ALLOTEY &amp; ANOTHER <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT,
ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1973]
2 GLR 480<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

DATE:
20 SEPTEMBER 1973.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

AMOFAH FOR THE APPLICANTS.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

APALOO AG.C.J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF APALOO AG C. J.<o:p></o:p>Some time
in February this year, the Government of the United States of America requested
of the Ghana Government the extradition for trial in that country, of the two
applicants who are husband and wife. They were accused of a number of offences,
the most prominent of which is fraud by false pretences. Accordingly, they were
apprehended in this country on a warrant signed by a district magistrate and
charged on two counts of fraud by false pretences. Proceedings to extradite
them were accordingly commenced before the district court. The proceedings, by
order of the Chief Justice, were transferred to the circuit court where they
were heard and concluded before Judge Andoh (as he then was) on 29 August 1973.
Objection to the extradition of the applicants was taken on a great many
grounds, some of law, others of mixed fact and law and others on the facts. In a
careful and very painstaking ruling which ran into twenty pages of typescript
the learned judge dealt with the points seriatim. In the end, the judge
considered that there was a strong and probable presumption of guilt
established against the applicants on the charges. Having felt satisfied that
the requesting government fulfilled all the conditions laid down by law, he
held that the applicants were liable to be surrendered to the United States
Government to stand trial in the State of New York. Pending their extradition,
the judge ordered them both to be committed to prison.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>They seek
by this motion to question the validity of the proceedings and order and argue
for their release. The grounds on which they contest the order are contained in
an affidavit sworn to by the first applicant. These I am soon to examine but
before doing this, I should relate the facts as revealed by the depositions.
The first applicant is a Ghanaian who went to the United States, it is said
about 25 years ago. His wife is an American citizen by birth but seems to have
originated from the West Indian island of Barbados. The evidence shows little
of their background educationally or otherwise save that the first applicant
was passing off as a prince and the second applicant a princess. Some time in
1970, they applied to the Government of Equatorial Guinea for permission to
import that country’s cocoa for sale in the United States. That government
granted them such permission and authorised its representative in the United
States to communicate this to them. He did by a letter dated 14 September 1970.
They accordingly commenced negotiations with the Chamber of Agriculture at
Santa Isabella called for short Camara. They offered to buy the cocoa at 30.33
cents a pound that being approximately the then prevailing market price. This
offer was declined by Camara who made a counter offer of 34 cents per pound.
Unless the applicants had reason to believe that the market price in the United
States was going to appreciate within a short time, they were consciously
heading for a loss. It is to be noted that the applicants had no capital nor
expertise of any sort in the cocoa trade.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On their
agreeing to buy at the price offered by Camara, the latter agreed to sell and
ship them 2,000 tons. When they became cognisant of this, they formed and
registered a business named Stephen &amp; Co. On the very day that they did
this, they contracted to sell the bulk of the shipment to General Cocoa Company
- a firm in the United States, at a price which was less than they offered to
pay for it. That company in due course issued letters of credit in their
favour. When the shipment was made, the legal documents of title were forwarded
to a bank in the United States called the Community National Bank in Staten
Island. The applicants got hold of these and on delivering them to the Cocoa
Company were paid 80 per cent of the contract price. When the cocoa eventually
arrived and was passed by the Food and Drug Administration, they were paid the
balance of the contract price. This came to a grand total of $1,015,755.93. The
applicants paid none of this to Camara although they sent a telegram and made
other written promises of payment. On receipt of this sum, they changed their
bankers. They opened and paid this sum to their credit in a bank called J.
Henry Schroeder. Before then, they had dealt with the Community National Bank.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></spa</main>