AHEVI vs. AKOTO IV [1992]DLHC701

Date	1992-02-03
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1992]DLHC701

ACQUAH J

VICTOR DOTSE (WITH HIM MISS P DENNIS) FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

MENSA-ETSI FOR THE DEFENDANTS.

[1992]DLHC701
																																						<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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">AHEVI<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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">AKOTO IV<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, HO]<o:p></o:p>[1993-94] 1 GLR 512<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">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="right" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:right;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">Date: 3
FEBRUARY 1992<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>VICTOR DOTSE (WITH HIM MISS P DENNIS) FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<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">

MENSA-ETSI FOR THE DEFENDANTS.
<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT OF ACQUAH J.<o:p></o:p>This is an interesting case which deals with beliefs and practices
in juju, fetish and trial by ordeal of the people of the Dodome Traditional
Area in the Volta Region.<o:p></o:p>One Vincentia Dogoe, a fairly elderly fetish priestess of Dodome
Awiasu, died in February 1989. Soon after her death, an eighteen-year old
mother of two children called Esi Bisi rushed to the chief and behaving as if
possessed by some spirit said that she had something important to tell the
chief and his elders, and that the plaintiff and one Ahele Kwamla must be
called to listen to her message. When the plaintiff and this Ahele Kwamla came,
Esi Bisi said that it was Ahele Kwamla who killed Vincentia Dogoe by juju, and
that the plaintiff too was using juju to render ineffective the hospital
mortuary where the dead body of Vincentia Dogoe had been deposited, so that the
deceased would not have a decent burial.<o:p></o:p>The chief felt that the allegations of Esi Bisi were too serious
for his private consumption and so moved his seat from his palace to the public
arena for the entire community of Dodome-Awiasu to hear of them. At the public
arena Esi Bisi repeated her allegations. The plaintiff and Ahele Kwamla were,
according to the custom in the area, thus to respond to the allegations. If
they admitted them, customary sanctions would be imposed; if they denied them,
they had to undergo a trial by ordeal prove their innocence.<o:p></o:p>Ahele Kwamla admitted that he killed Vincentia Dogoe by juju. He
was then punished by ordering him to provide one ram, four bottles of schnapps
and ¢60,000. He left to find these items and it is alleged that he had since
not returned to the community. The plaintiff, on the other hand, denied the
accusations and was thus obliged to prove his innocence.<o:p></o:p>The chief’s linguist, a representative of the youth and relatives of
the plaintiff accompanied him to a fetish priest at Ada Junction where he
underwent a trial by ordeal. He was declared innocent at the trial and he,
returned with the delegation to report the result to the chief and people of
Awiasu who had gathered waiting to hear from them. The fetish priest at Ada
Junction gave the plaintiff some herbal preparations to cleanse himself from
further accusations.<o:p></o:p>On their return, the chief’s linguist in his report forgot to
disclose that the plaintiff was given some herbal preparations. The evidence
shows that the gathering were not happy with the result of the trial. And Esi
Bisi in rejecting the result of the ordeal, went on to make further accusations
against the plaintiff by saying that the plaintiff was responsible for the
death of his, the plaintiff’s, own child called Ruby Ahevi and that of
Benedicta Atsri, the plaintiff’s sister in-law. She further said that the
plaintiff was gradually causing by means of juju the death of his, the
plaintiff’s, own child called Doris. According to the plaintiff, he referred
these later accusations to the defendants herein but they did nothing about it.
And so he summoned Esi Bisi before Togbe Adzimah’s fetish cult at Klikor but
the second defendant prevented Esi Bisi from appearing before that cult, and
rather offered to go into that complaint.<o:p></o:p>On 28 May 1989 therefore the second defendant came down from his
village to Awiasu and ordered a gong-gong to be beaten for the entire people to
meet on the dispute between Esi Bisi and the plaintiff. The plaintiff was sent
for but he refused to respond to the call and rather sent word that he had no
case with Esi Bisi in respect of which the second defendant and his chiefs and
people could go into.<o:p></o:p>It is the case of the plaintiff that on that day, ie 28 May 1989,
the defendants uttered and published the very words Esi Bisi uttered against
him on his return from Ada Junction and which words are set out in paragraph
(9) of his statement of claim. Thereafter, according to the plaintiff, the defendants
published a second group of words at the same meeting substantially ostracising
him from the community and portraying him as a murderer and a jujuman who is
unfit to live in their society. He sets out the said words in paragraph (10) of
his statement of claim. Contending therefore that the two groups of words in
paragraphs (9) and (10) are defamatory and further that the whole process of
going through the trial by ordeal constituted false imprisonment and malicious
prosecution, he instituted this action claiming from the defendants jointly and
severally as per his amended writ of summons:<o:p></o:p>