Try asking the following...
J U D G M E N T
DOTSE, J.S.C:
William Blackstone, the 18th century English Jurist, is credited with the following statement, which has had profound application in common law jurisdictions including Ghana. He stated and I quote:
“Better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer”
The story is also told of a Chinese law Professor who, when he was advised on the American and common law belief that it was better that a thousand guilty men go free than one innocent man be executed, retorted “Better for whom?” The Chinese law Professor was answered thus:
“Better for all, because as history has proven, if anyone can be unlawfully jailed, everyone can be unlawfully jailed”.
These are the principles that have underpinned the criteria for establishing the ingredients for offences such as contempt. This is because contempt is quasi-criminal and has to be proved beyond all reasonable doubt against whoever is accused of having flouted or disobeyed the court’s orders.
In Re: Effiduase Stool Affairs (No.2) Republic vrs. Numapau, President of the National House of Chiefs and others Ex-parte Ameyaw 11 (No.2) [1998-99] SCGLR 639 the Supreme Court stated as follows:
“Since contempt of court was quasi-criminal and the punishment for it might include a fine or imprisonment the standard of proof required was proof beyond reasonable doubt. An applicant must, therefore, first make out a prima facie case of contempt before the court could consider the defences put upon by the respondents”
We believe that it is also to reinforce this time tested principle of the contemnor being presumed innocent until proven guilty that the Supreme Court in the case of Republic vrs. SITO 1 Ex-parte Fordjour [2001-2002] SCGLR 322, laid down the following as the essential elements in dealing with the offence of contempt:
“There must be a judgment or order requiring the contemnor to do or abstain from doing something.
It must be shown that the contemnor knows what precisely he is expected to do or abstain from doing and
It must be shown that he failed to comply with the terms of the judgment or order and that disobedience is willful”
FACTS OF THE CASE
The facts of this case due to their presentation from the trial High Court to this court now admit of some complexities.
On the 14th day of April, 1997 an action was commenced before the Judicial Committee of the Gomoa Akyempim Traditional Council in a suit titled Ebusyanpanyin Kodwo Abor and 3 others vrs. Nana Abor Ewusie