SAMMY CRABBE vs. ATTORNEY GENERAL, MIN. OF JUSTICE AND THE DIRECTOR, BNI [2009]DLHC4299

Date	2009-08-18
Suit No.	SUIT NO. HRCM/04/09
Citation No.	[2009]DLHC4299

JUSTICE UUTER P. DERY

MR. KWAME BOATENG FOR APPLICANT

MR. BARTON ODURO DEPUTY ATTORNEY-GENERAL (MR. NICHOLAS

KWARTENG ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY WITH HIM) FOR RESPONDENTS

[2009]DLHC4299
																																						<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" ><a name="OLE_LINK1">SAMMY
CRABBE<o:p></o:p></a>vs.<o:p></o:p>ATTORNEY GENERAL, MIN. OF JUSTICE AND THE DIRECTOR, BNI<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH COURT (HUMAN RIGHT DIVISION), ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 2.0pt 0in">

SUIT NO. HRCM/04/09&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;DATE: 18TH
AUGUST,
2009 <o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>MR. KWAME BOATENG
FOR APPLICANT<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">

&nbsp;MR.
BARTON ODURO, DEPUTY ATTORNEY-GENERAL (MR. NICHOLAS KWARTENG, ASSISTANT STATE
ATTORNEY, WITH HIM) FOR RESPONDENTS <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 1.0pt 0in">

JUSTICE UUTER P. DERY, HIGH COURT JUDGE.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</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="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>In a notice of motion, the applicant, Sammy Crabbe, seeks the following
reliefs from this court: <o:p></o:p>1) A declaration that it is unconstitutional,
unlawful and a breach of the fundamental human rights guaranteed by the 1992
Constitution of the Republic of Ghana for the respondents and/or any other body
or institution which forms part of the organs of the government of Ghana to
deny or refuse the applicant, any citizen of Ghana or any body or institution
the right to his or her lawyer(s) during an arrest, detention or restriction
which the respondents (namely the Attorney-General and the Director of Bureau
of National Investigations (BNI)) term as “an invitation” or “friendly chat” or
during any meetings, conversations or interrogations or any other forms of communication
however same is termed with the respondent or any of its organs.<o:p></o:p>2) An order of perpetual injunction restraining
the respondents from denying or refusing the applicant’s constitutional right
of accessing his lawyer(s) during an arrest, restriction or detention which the
respondents term as “an invitation” or “friendly chat” or during any meetings,
conversations or interrogations or any other forms of communication however
same is termed with the respondents or any of its organs.<o:p></o:p>The applicant supported his application
with an affidavit in which he deposed to the facts upon which he is invoking
the jurisdiction of this court.<o:p></o:p>The facts from the affidavit evidence are
that the applicant was invited on Thursday,
11th June, 2009 by telephone by an unidentified caller claiming
to represent the respondents asking him to report to the head office of the BNI
in Accra without informing him the reason for the said invitation. Out of
respect, he obliged accompanied by his lawyer. On arrival at the offices of the
BNI, their mobile cell phones and other communication equipments were collected
from them and they were driven to another BNI facility. There, an agent of the
respondents asked him to accompany him into a room for what he termed “a
friendly conversation” and refused a request to be accompanied by his lawyer
saying their standard practice does not permit the presence of lawyers. He,
therefore, went with the said agent in the absence of his lawyer under protest
where he was interrogated on Ghana International Airline Limited issues for
sometime and later released to go home but with orders to return another time.<o:p></o:p>On 17th
June, 2009, he reported again as ordered and the presence of his lawyer
again was denied with the same excuse of standard practice. Thereafter, he has
been schedule for other meetings.<o:p></o:p>It is thus the case of the applicant that
the conduct of the respondents in denying him the presence of his lawyer during
the investigations is a violation of his constitutional rights and amounts to
an abuse of office and denial of due process. And if this court does not come
to his aid in restraining the respondents they will continue to violate his
said rights by continually inviting him to their offices, depriving him of the
presence of his lawyer and refusing to disclose the subject-matter of their
investigations.<o:p></o:p>The applicant filed this motion on 23rd June, 2009, and both
respondents were served on the 24th
June, 2009. The application was fixed for hearing on 15th July, 2009. By the said date, the respondents had
not filed any affidavit in opposition, neither did they appear in court.
Counsel for the applicant moved the motion after which the case was adjourned
for ruling. Before the due date for the ruling, the Attorney-General filed an
application for extension of time to file an affidavit in opposition and
exhibited the said affidavit</main>