DODZIE SABBAH vs. THE REPUBLIC [2015]DLSC3225

Date	2015-06-11
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J3/3/2012
Citation No.	[2015]DLSC3225

WOOD (MRS.) CJ (PRESIDING)

ADINYIRA (MRS.) JSC

DOTSE JSC

BENIN JSC

AKAMBA JSC

AHUMAH OCANSEY ESQ. FOR THE APPELLANT.

MARINA A. APPIAH OPARE MRS. ESQ. (PRINCIPAL STATE ATTORNEY) FOR THE RESPONDENT

[2015]DLSC3225
																																						<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" >DODZIE SABBAH<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[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">

CIVIL
APPEAL NO. J3/3/2012&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: 11TH
JUNE, 2015<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>AHUMAH OCANSEY ESQ. 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">

MARINA A. APPIAH OPARE
MRS. ESQ.&nbsp; (PRINCIPAL STATE ATTORNEY) FOR
THE RESPONDENT<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">

</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">

JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>WOOD
(MRS.) CJ, <o:p></o:p>Article 14(7) of the 1992 Constitution
provides an extra layer of protection to personal liberty, consolidating the guaranteed
fundamental human right to liberty enshrined in article 14 (1) of the 1992
Constitution. It states:<o:p></o:p>“Where a person who has served the whole or a part of his
sentence is acquitted on appeal by a court, other than the Supreme Court, the
court may certify to the Supreme Court that the person acquitted be paid
compensation; and the Supreme Court may, upon examination of all the facts and
the certificate of the court concerned, award such compensation as it may think
fit; or, where acquittal is by the Supreme Court, it may order compensation to
be paid to the person acquitted.”<o:p></o:p>The full scope and effect of article 14
(7) has however never been subjected to judicial scrutiny since the coming into
force of the 1992 Constitution. The dominant question in this appeal centres on
the grounds on which an appellate court, other than the Supreme Court, may
certify to the Supreme Court, pursuant to article 14 (7), that an individual
who has served either the whole or part of his sentence, and is subsequently
acquitted, be paid compensation.<o:p></o:p>Central to this broad question is the true
and proper construction to be placed on the article 14(7). This appeal thus involves
an examination of the jurisprudence on:<o:p></o:p>(a) the public law remedy available to
an aggrieved person under article 14 (7) and;<o:p></o:p>(b)the principles governing the payment
and assessment of compensation, against the State.<o:p></o:p>What are the key facts which triggered
this appeal? In January 1993, the applicant and his brother were arrested and charged
with the offences of conspiracy to murder and murder one Amegbor Amedorme. They
were convicted on both charges and sentenced to death on August 7th,
2001. He however successfully appealed his convictions on both charges on
grounds of jury misdirection.<o:p></o:p>Following his acquittal, on the 8th
of July 2004, he applied, under article 14(7), to the Court of Appeal
differently constituted, for certification to the Supreme Court that he be paidC400,000,000(four
hundred million old cedis) as compensation for the losses he claimed he had suffered
during the period of his incarceration. In opposing the application the State,
inter alia, contended via affidavit evidence that the appellant was:<o:p></o:p>“…lawfully convicted and sentenced according to law after a
fair trial where the Natural Justice rule was fully observed.” Furthermore that;<o:p></o:p>“…the mere fact that he had been acquitted on appeal does
not give him right to make any claim for compensation unless he can prove that
his trial, conviction and sentence were incongruous with legality therefore his
human rights have been infringed by his unlawful trial, conviction and
sentence…”<o:p></o:p>The court dismissed his application, reasoning
inter alia that:<o:p></o:p>“…Article 14(7) of the Constitution, 1992 was
int</main>