THE REPUBLIC vs. EDWARD ACQUAYE @NANA ABOR YAMOAH II [2008]DLSC6237

Date	2008-12-10
Suit No.	SUIT NO. CA J4/11/2008
Citation No.	[2008]DLSC6237

AKUFFO

(MS) J.S.C (PRESIDING)

DATE-BAH J.S.C

ADINYIRA (MRS) J.S.C

OWUSU (MS) J.S.C

DOTSE J.S.C

EFFAH-DARTEY FOR THE APPELLANT

GEORGE ANKUMAH MENSAH FOR THE RESPONDENT

[2008]DLSC6237
																																						<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" >THE REPUBLIC<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"><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>EDWARD ACQUAYE @NANA ABOR YAMOAH II<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"><o:p></o:p>[SUPREME
COURT, ACCRA]<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">

SUIT NO. CA J4/11/2008&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;DATE: 10TH DECEMBER, 2008<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>EFFAH-DARTEY
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">

GEORGE
ANKUMAH MENSAH FOR THE RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;
<o:p></o:p>AKUFFO,(MS)
J.S.C (PRESIDING),DATE-BAH J.S.C,ADINYIRA (MRS) J.S.C, OWUSU (MS) J.S.C, DOTSE
J.S.C<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%;
border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>DOTSE,
J.S.C. <o:p></o:p>William Blackstone, the 18th century
English Jurist, is credited with the following statement, which has had
profound application in common law jurisdictions including Ghana. He stated and
I quote: <o:p></o:p>“Better that ten guilty persons escape than
one innocent suffer”<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The
story is also told of a Chinese law Professor who, when he was advised on the
American and common law belief that it was better that a thousand guilty men go
free than one innocent man be executed, retorted “Better for whom?” The Chinese
law Professor was answered thus:<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; <o:p></o:p>“Better for all, because as history has
proven, if anyone can be unlawfully jailed, everyone can be unlawfully jailed”.
<o:p></o:p>These are the principles that have
underpinned the criteria for establishing the ingredients for offences such as
contempt. This is because contempt is quasi-criminal and has to be proved
beyond all reasonable doubt against whoever is accused of having flouted or
disobeyed the court’s orders.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In Re: Effiduase Stool Affairs (No.2)
Republic vrs. Numapau, President of the National House of Chiefs and others
Ex-parte Ameyaw 11 (No.2) [1998-99] SCGLR 639 the Supreme Court stated as
follows:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“Since contempt of court was quasi-criminal
and the punishment for it might include a fine or imprisonment the standard of
proof required was proof beyond reasonable doubt. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>An applicant must, therefore, first make
out a prima facie case of contempt before the court could consider the defences
put upon by the respondents”<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;We
believe that it is also to reinforce this time tested principle of the
contemnor being presumed innocent until proven guilty that the Supreme Court in
the case of Republic vrs. SITO 1 Ex-parte Fordjour [2001-2002] SCGLR 322, laid
down the following as the essential elements in dealing with the offence of contempt:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“There must be a judgment or order requiring
the contemnor to do or abstain from doing something. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It must be shown that the contemnor knows
what precisely he is expected to do or abstain from doing and It must be shown
that he failed to comply with the terms of the judgment or order and that
disobedience is willful”<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>FACTS
OF THE CASE <o:p></o:p>The facts of this case due to their
presentation from the trial High Court to this court now admit of some
complexities. <o:p></o:p>On the 14th day of April, 1997 an action
was commenced before the Judicial Committee of the Gomoa Akyempim Tradition</main>