AWUDU ALHASSAN SULEMANA @ DOZER MOHAMMED SOLEMANA @ BABANA AND SALAMATU KARIM @ MOTHER vs. THE REPUBLIC [2016]DLCA4799

AWUDU ALHASSAN SULEMANA @ DOZER MOHAMMED SOLEMANA @ BABANA AND SALAMATU KARIM @... [2016]DLCA4799

Date	2016-07-28
Suit No.	CRIMINAL SUIT NO. H2/6/16
Citation No.	[2016]DLCA4799

KANYOKE J.A. (PRESIDING)

ACQUAYE J.A.

WELBOURNE (MRS) J.A.

RAPHAEL ALIJINA FOR APPELLANTS

MALIKE WOANYAH DEY (SSA) RESPONDENT

[2016]DLCA4799
																																						<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" >AWUDU ALHASSAN SULEMANA
@ DOZER MOHAMMED SOLEMANA @ BABANA AND SALAMATU KARIM @ MOTHER<o:p></o:p>(APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></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">

CRIMINAL SUIT NO. H2/6/16&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:&nbsp; 28TH JULY, 2016<o:p></o:p>

MALIKE
WOANYAH DEY (SSA) RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>WELBOURNE (MRS), J.A.<o:p></o:p>Background:<o:p></o:p>This
appeal is brought by the 1st &amp; 2nd accused persons as Appellants. The
Appellants and the 3rd accused person are standing trial on indictment before
the High Court, Accra.<o:p></o:p>The
Appellants have been charged with the offences of Conspiracy to commit murder
and murder and the 3rd accused has been charged with the offence of abetment of
murder.<o:p></o:p>During
the course of the trial, the Appellants raised an objection to the tendering of
the confession caution statement that the police procured from the Appellants.
On 1st December, 2015, the trial judge ordered a mini-trial to determine
whether or not the statements were obtained voluntarily.<o:p></o:p>On
17th December, 2015, the trial judge dismissed the objection of the Appellants
and admitted the confession caution statements in evidence as Exhibits ‘A’ and
‘B’ respectively.<o:p></o:p>(The
ruling can be found at pages 53-54 of the record of appeal)<o:p></o:p>Dissatisfied
with the ruling, the Appellants filed the following grounds of appeal:<o:p></o:p>a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the trial judge erred in holding
that the caution statements were voluntarily obtained from Appellants and,<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the ruling admitting the caution
statements in evidence cannot be supported having regard to the evidence
adduced at the mini-trial and the law.<o:p></o:p>The
grounds shall be considered together as they are inter- related. The whole
appeal hinges on whether or not the confession statements were taken
voluntarily or not. In such a determination, one has to look at the procedure
used in obtaining the statements. The Evidence Act, 1975 (as amended) provides
that: <o:p></o:p>Section
120: <o:p></o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In a criminal action, evidence of a
hearsay statement made by an accused admitting matter which:<o:p></o:p>a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Constitute; or<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Forms an essential part of; or<o:p></o:p>c.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Taken together with other information
already disclosed by him is a basis for an inference of,<o:p></o:p>The
commission of a crime for which he is being tried in the action is not
admissible against him unless the statement was made voluntarily.<o:p></o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Evidence of a hearsay statement shall
not be admissible under subjection (1) if the statement was made by the
declarant while arrested, restricted or detained by the State unless the
statement was made in the presence of an independent witness (other than a
police officer or member of the Armed Forces) approved by the accused.<o:p></o:p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The independent witness must be a
person who:<o:p></o:p>a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Can understand the language spoken by
accused;<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Can read and understand the language in
which the statement is made,<o:p></o:p>