PIUS UMEZULIKE OBIDIUME vs. THE REPUBLIC [2020]DLCA9265

Date	2020-07-16
Suit No.	SUIT NO H2/13/19
Citation No.	[2020]DLCA9265

DENNIS ADJEI J. A. (PRESIDING)

AMMA A. GAIZIE J.A.

ERIC K. BAFFOUR J.A

APPELLANT IN CUSTODY

LONGINUS UMAEHIE FOR APPELLANT

ASHONG OKAI FOR REPUBLIC

[2020]DLCA9265
																																						<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" >PIUS UMEZULIKE OBIDIUME<o:p></o:p>(APPELLANT)<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><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

SUIT NO H2/13/19&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 16TH JULY, 2020<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>APPELLANT IN CUSTODY<o:p></o:p>LONGINUS UMAEHIE FOR
APPELLANT<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

ASHONG OKAI FOR REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>DENNIS ADJEI J. A.
(PRESIDING), AMMA A. GAIZIE J.A., ERIC K. BAFFOUR J.A<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 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<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:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Baffour J.A:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The menace that the
illicit drug trade has had on this nation and the world at large cannot be
recounted here. The traffickers in search of filthy lucre have wrecked
incalculable damage to people and thereby given blasted hopes to most of our
unguided youth that fall victim to narcotic drugs. Whiles our laws are
stringent enough to dissuade people from taking trading in narcotics as a way
of life, our courts have also imposed the severest of punishment upon
conviction. This appeal raises for our consideration the exercise of the
discretion of the trial Judge in imposing sentence and whether there is any
justification for us to review the sentence that was imposed within the context
of the law and in the exercise of our powers.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The Appellant, a Nigerian
by nationality was arraigned before the High Court, Fast Track Division, on the
25th of July, 2014 and charged with two counts of importation of
narcotic drugs into Ghana without a license and second count of possession of
narcotic drugs, all contrary to sections 1(1) and 2(1) respectively of the
Narcotic Drugs (Control, Enforcement and Sanctions) Law, 1990, PNDCL 236.
Appellant pleaded not guilty to both counts. In a trial that did not last for
long, prosecution called four witnesses after which the court found a prima
facie case established against the Appellant and invited him to open his
defence. The Appellant gave a sworn testimony after which he also closed his
case. In his judgment the trial court found the case of the prosecution proved
reasonable doubt. The court accordingly convicted the Appellant and sentenced
him to eighteen years (18) imprisonment with hard labour. It is the sentence of
eighteen years, that he finds harsh and excessive which has precipitated this
appeal.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>But first the facts of the
case at the trial: Appellant arrived from Brazil on the 16th of
October, 2013 at about 11:45am on board Ethiopian Airlines. Whiles going
through arrival formalities, he was accosted by two officials of the Narcotics
Control Board (NACOB) stationed at the Kotoka International Airport. Searches
in his two-luggage revealed eight wine bottles and a sachet of creamy
substances concealed in his clothes. That a field test of the substances at the
Ghana Standards Authority proved positive for cocaine based on which he was
arraigned. He was convicted on the 25th of July, 2014, almost a year
after his arrest and has been in custody since then. Having served about five
years of his sentence, he sought and was granted leave by the Court of Appeal
on the 11th of March, 2019 to appeal wherein he has appealed against
his sentence with the sole ground being that the sentence imposed on the
Appellant was excessive and harsh.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>I begin the analysis with a
caveat in an appeal of this nature. And that is sentence is an exercise of the
discretionary power by a Judge and as long as the Judge has kept within the
confines of what the law prescribes and has also considered the necessary
aggravating and mitigating factors before passing the sentence, an appellate
court, even if it would have imposed a different sentence, must be slow to substitute
its own with that of the trial Judge. For it is the generally the rule that an appellate court should be reluctant in
interfering with the exercise of discretion by a trial court in so far as the
Judge has not misdirected himself by taking into consideration irrelevant or
unproved matters, or omitting to consider relevant matters. Anin Yeboah JSC (as
the then was) in the civil case of PRINCE
WILLIAM TAGOE v ALBERT ACQUAH; Civil
Appeal No. J4/24/2008, dated 11th March, 2009 cited the guiding leading English case on the exercise of discretion in
the ca</main>