THE REPUBLIC v. JOSEPH NII MENSAH ASHONG, EX PARTE: JONES QUAIN

DECISION

Introduction:

The Applicant has brought this application to vindicate the law and its sanctions. He accuses the Respondent of breaking the law by disrespecting a judgment of the court, thereby bringing the administration of justice into disrepute.

Black’s Law Dictionary 8th Edition defines contempt as “conduct that defies the authority or dignity of a Court or legislature. Because such conduct interferes with the administration of justice, it is punishable, usually by fine or imprisonment.” The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English by A.S. Hornby (7th Edition) also defines contempt of court as “the crime of refusing to obey an order made by a court; not showing respect for a court or judge.”

The power of the High Court to punish for contempt is provided in S.10 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29) and Articles 19(12) and 126 of the 1992 Republican Constitution of Ghana.

There is no codified legislation in Ghana that defines the act or omission that constitute the offence of contempt. It therefore sounds to reason that Ghanaian courts resort to case law to resolve any issue regarding contempt when confronted with one.

The Supreme Court confirmed the non-codified nature of contempt in Ghana in the case of IN RE: EFFIDUASE STOOL AFFAIRS (No.2) EX PARTE AMEYAW II (1998-99) SCGLR 639 @ 660 when His Lordship Acquah JSC (as he then was) stated that:

“My lords, contempt of Court is the only common law offence still known to our law, as same is saved by article 19(12) of the 1992 Constitution and Section 10 of the Criminal Code, 1960 (Act 29). And unlike other countries where the offence is codified like the English Contempt of Court Act of 1981, ours is still case law”.

The Learned jurist, Acquah JSC (as he then was) in the same case EX PARTE AMEYAW II SUPRA further judicially articulated what constitutes contempt when he summed up the law in an apt and concise manner as follows:

“In brief, contempt is constituted by any act or omissions tending to obstruct or interfere with the orderly administration of justice, or to impair the dignity of the court or respect for its authority.”

In R v SITO I; EXPARTE FORDJOUR (2001-2002) SCGLR 322 the Supreme Court further gave yet another dimension to the definition of contempt. Their Lordships gave the elements constituting the offence of contempt as that:-

a) there should have been a judgment or order which required the contemnor to do or abstain from doing something;

b) the cont