OSAFO vs. THE REPUBLIC [1994]DLCA820

Date	1994-12-22
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1994]DLCA820

ESSIEM JA

FORSTER JA

ACQUAH JA

J O AMUI FOR THE APPELLANT.

ANTHONY GYAMBIBY SENIOR STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE REPUBLIC.

[1994]DLCA820
																																						<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">OSAFO<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">THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1993-94] 2 GLR 402<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: 22
December 1994<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>J O AMUI FOR THE APPELLANT.<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">

ANTHONY GYAMBIBY, SENIOR STATE ATTORNEY, FOR THE REPUBLIC. <o:p></o:p>

ESSIEM, FORSTER AND ACQUAH JJA<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT OF ACQUAH JA.<o:p></o:p>This is an appeal against the judgment of the National Public
Tribunal dated 3 April 1991 wherein the appellant was convicted for possessing
narcotic drugs contrary to section 2(1) and (2) of the Narcotic Drugs (Control,
Enforcement and Sanctions) Law, 1990 (PNDCL 236), and sentenced to twelve
years’ imprisonment with hard labour and a fine of ¢5 million or in default ten
years imprisonment with hard labour.<o:p></o:p>The facts are that a team of five police and five civil defence
organisation personnel acting on a tip-off rushed to the Ginseng Restaurant and
Night Club, Asylum Down at about 4.00 am. The club was closed and so they
ordered the watchman to take them to the residence of the proprietors. The
watchman therefore took them to house No 38/4, Coconut Avenue, Asylum Down. The
watchman knocked at the main gate and one Samuel Ameyaw came out. Later the
appellant too emerged from his room. The team introduced themselves to them and
made known their mission. They allowed Ameyaw and the appellant to search them.
Thereafter they began their search from room to room for narcotic drugs. In
Ameyaw’s room the team found $14,000 which Ameyaw claimed ownership of and
produced the relevant covering documents. In the course of searching the
appellant’s room, a polythene bag containing oval shaped balls was discovered.
According to the first prosecution witness, when he questioned the appellant
about it he claimed it belonged to a friend called Stephen Yaw Amoako. It was
later opened in the presence of the appellant and found to contain 134 oval
shaped balls. The appellant and Ameyaw were taken to the police station. All
attempts to apprehend this Stephen Yaw Amoako proved futile. Consequently, the
appellant and Stephen Yaw Amoako were charged before the National Public Tribunal
for:<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">“Statement of Offence: <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">Possession of Narcotic Drugs, contrary to section 2(1) and (2) of
the Narcotic Drugs (Control, Enforcement and Sanctions) Law, 1990 (PNDCL 236). <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">Particulars of Offence: <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">Charles Kofi Osafo, businessman of Accra and Stephen Yaw Amoako of
no known address on or about 25 May 1990 in Asylum Down in Accra in the Greater
Accra Region and within the jurisdiction of this tribunal had in your
possession, without lawful authority 134 oval shaped balls containing 919.94
grammes of heroin.”<o:p></o:p>At the trial the prosecution called three witnesses, two of
whom—first and second prosecution witnesses—took part in the operation at the
premises of the appellant. These two witnesses recounted how the operation was
carried out and how the drugs were discovered under the bed in the room of the
appellant. The main difference in their evidence relates to the appellant’s
reaction to a question about the ownership of the polythene bag when it was
discovered.<o:p></o:p>For whereas the first prosecution witness said that the appellant
replied that the polythene bag belonged to his friend, the second prosecution
witness said that the appellant kept mute. The last prosecution witness, the
third prosecution witness, was the investigation officer. He testified that
because the appellant alleged that the polythene bag was in a bag brought to
him on 24 May 1990 for safe-keeping by his friend, one Stephen Yaw Amoako, who
he alleged was travelling the following day to Amsterdam, police wireless
message was immediately sent throughout all entry points of this country for
the arrest of anyone bearing the said name. Consequently, someone bearing the
name of Stephen Yaw Amoako was arrested at the Aflao border, brought down to the
Narcotic Unit, CID headquarters for identification. But the appellant said he
was not that friend of his. He said the appellant was also taken to his house
where he pointed out a blue bag, among a number of bags, as being the said bag
of this friend Amoako. A number of items were found in this blue bag, including
an identity card bearing a picture and particulars of this alleged Stephen Yaw
Amoako. There were also two letters requesting for visas from the American and
British embassies; clothing, and footwear.<o:p></o:p>