THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ECONOMIC AND ORGANIZED CRIME OFFICE vs. TWENEBOAH KODUAH [2015]DLCA6600

Date	2015-04-30
Suit No.	SUIT NO.: H1/59/2015
Citation No.	[2015]DLCA6600

KUSI APPIAH J. A (PRESIDING)

HONYENUGAH J.A.

TORKORNOO J. A.

KORKOR OKUTU FOR APPELLANT

EDWARD CUDJOE FOR RESPONDENT

[2015]DLCA6600
																																						<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
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ECONOMIC AND ORGANIZED CRIME OFFICE<o:p></o:p>(APPLICANT/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>TWENEBOAH
KODUAH<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT/APPLICANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, 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">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">SUIT
NO.: H1/59/2015&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; &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:
30TH
APRIL, 2015<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">EDWARD CUDJOE FOR
RESPONDENT <o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
115%;mso-outline-level:1;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">KUSI APPIAH, J. A
(PRESIDING) HONYENUGAH, J.A. AND TORKORNOO, J. A.<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">

</div>TORKORNOO,
J. A. <o:p></o:p>On
15th February 2012, the Respondent in this appeal filed an application for an
order confirming the freezing, seizing and transferring of the funds in the
accounts of the Appellant with Ecobank, Kejetia Branch following the filing of
a Suspicious Transaction Report by the bank. The application was pursuant to
Sections 24, 33, 34, and 35 of the Economic and Organised Crime Office Act 2010
Act 804. This order was granted by the High Court on 20th February 2012. <o:p></o:p>Almost
a year later on 17th December 2012, the Respondent filed an application for an
order to confiscate and transfer tainted asset/proceeds of crimes pursuant to <o:p></o:p>Sections
46, 47, 50, 51 and 56 of Act 804. The court ordered on 19th December 2012 that
notice of the application be published once. The Motion was repeated and set to
be moved on 28th February 2013. On 28th February 2013, the order for
confiscation was granted by the high court. <o:p></o:p>On
23rd January 2014, the appellant per his counsel filed an application to set
aside the order of confiscation. This application was refused on 12th February,
2014 and costs of One Thousand Ghana cedis (GH¢1,000.00) awarded against the
appellant. <o:p></o:p>The
Appellant filed an appeal against this ruling of 12th February, 2014 on 11th
March 2014. The appeal is against the ruling of 19th December 2012 and the
order refusing to set it aside on 12th February 2014. <o:p></o:p>First
it must be said that it is strange that the Appellant should direct spears at
the order of 19th December, 2012 which ordered the single publication, and
leave the order of 28th February, 2013 which confiscated assets based on that
single publication. It would seem to be a rather vacuous effort which tries to
touch the contaminated egg while leaving the poisoned chicken hatched out of it
running free. <o:p></o:p>Be
that as it may, counsel for Respondent in her written submissions has drawn
this court’s attention to the filing of the appeal out of time, and argued that
it cannot clothe the court with jurisdiction to hear it. <o:p></o:p>Rule
9 (1) (a) of the Court of Appeal Rules 1997 C I 19 directs that an appeal
against an interlocutory decision shall not be brought after the expiration of
twenty one days. Although the rules allow the grant of leave for extension of
time within which to appeal against a final decision in Rule 9 (1) (b), this is
not the case for interlocutory appeals. <o:p></o:p>Thus
an Appellant in an interlocutory appeal has 21 days from the date the ruling is
given to appeal and no more. In the present case, the Appellant filed his
appeal 28 days after the ruling. <o:p></o:p>Clearly,
this court cannot force a jurisdiction on itself which the law does not allow.
This is an interlocutory appeal against a ruling in a pending matter, and not a
final appeal against a final judgment. As settled in Opoku &amp; others vrs
Axes Company Ltd. (2011) 1 SCGLR 50 a judgment is not final unless it disposed
of all the disputed issues between the parties. In this case, the issues
between the parties have hardly been touched and the various orders made by the
court including the earlier freezing order and the confiscation order of 28th
February 2013, which have not been attacked in this appeal, remain solidly in
place. This is therefore unequivocally, an appeal against an interlocutory
decision. <o:p></o:p>