REPUBLIC v. BOSSMAN AND OTHERS
July 2, 1968
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- AMISSAH J.A
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Administrative Law
July 2, 1968
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
Try asking the following...
JUDGMENT OF AMISSAH J.A.
The first and second accused, Joseph Emmanuel Bossman and Andrew Stokes, are charged in three counts with conspiracy to extort, contrary to sections 23 (1) and 239 (1) of the Criminal Code, 1960 (Act 29). The particulars of those offences are as follows:
COUNT ONE
In or about 1966, at Accra in the Eastern Region [they] did agree with one Kwesi Armah then Minister of Trade, a public officer, that the said Kwesi Armah should demand under colour of his office as such public officer from one Maurice Pierce Salmon an amount representing ten per cent of the value of import licence to be issued to the said Maurice Pierce Salmon for the year 1966, which said amount the said Kwesi Armah knew he was not lawfully authorised to demand.
COUNT TWO
In or about 5 February 1966, at Accra in the Eastern Region [they] agreed with one Kwesi Armah then Minister of Trade, a public officer that the said Kwesi Armah should under colour of his office as such public officer obtain from one Maurice Pierce Salmon an amount of £G1,500 (N¢3,000) which said amount the said Kwesi Armah knew he was not lawfully authorised to obtain.
COUNT THREE
In or about 19 February 1966 at Accra in the Eastern Region [they] agreed with one Kwesi Armah, then Minister of Trade, a public officer, that the said Kwesi Armah should under colour of his office as such public officer obtain from one Maurice Pierce Salmon an amount of £G2,400 (N¢4,800) which said amount the said Kwesi Armah knew he was not lawfully authorised to obtain."
[p.598]
The first and the third accused, Emil Binder, are charged with conspiracy to commit wilful oppression contrary to sections 23 (1) and 239 (1) of the Criminal Code, 1960 (Act 29), in that:
"In or about January or February 1966 at Accra in the Eastern Region [they] agreed with one Kwesi Mould and one Kwesi Armah then Minister of Trade, a public officer, to commit crime, namely, that the said Kwesi Armah should wilfully commit an abuse of his authority in the grant of import licence of £G50,000 (N¢100,000) to Emil Binder in respect of Pioneer Engineering Company in excess of what the said company applied for the injury of the public [sic.]"
Considering first the charges of conspiracy to extort against the first and second accused, they were based on the following finding of the commission of inquiry into irregularities and malpractice in the grant of import licences (popularly known as the Ollennu Commission) at paragraph 848:
AI Generated Summary
This case arises from the Ollennu Commission’s inquiry into import licence irregularities. Joseph Emmanuel Bossman, Andrew Stokes, and Emil Binder faced charges under the Criminal Code, 1960 (Act 29), and proceedings were pursued via the Corrupt Practices (Prevention) Act, 1963 (Act 230), after adverse findings. The Commission found that Stokes demanded ten per cent commission, Salmon paid him, and Bossman arranged the licence, concluding that Bossman and Kwesi Mould induced corruption. Justice Amissah critically examined the record, noting internal inconsistencies about Mould’s role and highlighting comparable instances where influence led to mere irregularities, not corruption. He found material discrepancies in Salmon’s evidence—including the mismatch between the alleged percentage and the licence amount and conflicting payment locations. Applying the rule that co-conspirator statements require prior proof of conspiracy and that a lone accused cannot be convicted of conspiracy when co-accused are acquitted absent proof of other conspirators, the court held it unsafe to convict. For Binder, the court emphasized Act 230’s requirement of an explicit adverse finding and the need to call material witnesses, such as Mould. All accused were acquitted and discharged on all counts.