BADU vs. THE REPUBLIC [1974]DLHC2259

Date	1974-11-19
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1974]DLHC2259

ABBAN J.

P. A. ADJETEY FOR THE APPELLANT.

S. E. ASAMOAH SENIOR STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1974]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" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">BADU<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">&nbsp;vs. <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">THE REPUBLIC <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;[1974] 2 GLR 361<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DATE:
19 NOVEMBER 1974.<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">

P. A.
ADJETEY, FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

S. E.
ASAMOAH, SENIOR STATE ATTORNEY, FOR THE RESPONDENT.<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">

ABBAN J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ABBAN J.<o:p></o:p>The
appellant was convicted of the offence of intentional libel by the Circuit
Court, Accra, on 12 February 1971, and was sentenced to a day’s imprisonment
and a fine of ¢500.00 or a term of six months’ imprisonment. He appealed to
this court against his conviction on three grounds, namely:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(1) The
judgment is unreasonable and cannot be supported;<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(2) The
appellant was denied a fair trial inasmuch as he was prevented from leading
evidence on matters on which the Republic were permitted to lead evidence; and<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(3) The
learned trial judge erred in refusing to refer questions on the interpretation
of the Constitution, 1969, and matters falling within article 124 thereof to
the Supreme Court.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>I will
briefly state the facts of the case. The appellant was at the material time the
editor of a newspaper called The Spokesman. On 11 August 1970, The Spokesman
carried a front page editorial comment on the appointment of judges to the
Supreme Court, as established under the suspended Constitution of 1969. The
editorial in question was captioned as follows: “C.J. SPEAK NOW.” Under this
caption, the appellant made certain comments which, on the whole, indicated
that the appointment of the persons mentioned in the said editorial, including
the first prosecution witness, was not proper. The first prosecution witness,
at the time of his appointment to the Supreme Court, was a High Court judge
and, at the same time, the Interim Electoral Commissioner; and it was stated in
the editorial that the appointment of the first prosecution witness was a
reward for the assistance that he gave to the winning party in the 1969 general
elections. On reading a copy of this particular issue of The Spokesman the
first prosecution witness felt that he had been intentionally defamed and he
reported the matter to the Attorney-General. The appellant was then charged
with intentional libel, contrary to section 112 (2) of the Criminal Code, 1960
(Act 29).<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
newspaper, The Spokesman, was owned by a company called Spokesman Publications
Ltd. It appears this company had no printing facilities and the printing of the
newspaper was done by another company known as Floent Press Limited. Thus, the
managing director of that press was also charged with aiding and abetting the
appellant to commit the crime of intentional libel. But at the close of the
case for the prosecution, the learned circuit judge held that no prima facie
case had been made out against the director of the Floent Press Limited. The
said director was therefore acquitted and discharged. The appellant, however,
was called upon to make his defence and eventually he was convicted of the
crime charged.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Learned
counsel for the appellant first argued ground (2) as stated above. On that
ground, he submitted that there was undue interference by the learned circuit
judge when the appellant was trying to put forward his defence. Counsel
contended that the learned circuit judge unreasonably prevented
Lieutenant-General Ocran, the first defence witness, and Mr. J. W. K. Harlley,
the second defence witness, from answering every question put to them by
defence counsel during the examination-in-chief, even though the prosecution
did not object to those questions. Counsel argued that after the submission of
no case made on behalf of the appellant had been overruled, the appellant was
</main>