THE REPUBLIC v. JUSTICE HAGAN, EX PARTE: KWADWO KANPORDIMA & SARAH KANPORDIMA
April 11, 2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE KWEKU T. ACKAAH-BOAFO
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
April 11, 2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In a Ghanaian High Court application, the Applicants sought to commit Justice Hagan for contempt, alleging he disobeyed a 2014 interlocutory injunction in Kwadwo Kanpordima & Another v. Felix Edward Arthur and perjured himself in a joinder affidavit. The underlying suit was struck out in 2017 but relisted in 2018. Hagan denied wrongdoing, asserted residence since 2012, and was joined as a defendant on 23 October 2018; he argued he had never been served with the injunction order. The court outlined Ghanas contempt law, emphasized the quasi-criminal burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and highlighted that committal requires personal service of the order with a penal notice under Order 43 of CI 47, especially for non-parties. It rejected reliance on inferred notice from Hagans joinder affidavit and found that conflicting affidavits about construction lacked further evidentiary support. The application was dismissed, Hagan was acquitted and discharged, and costs of GH2,000 were awarded.
DECISION
APPLICATION FOR COMMITTAL FOR CONTEMPT
i. Introduction:
[1] The denial of liberty of any citizen of our Republic resulting from a charge of contempt is effected in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Even though there is no specific law on contempt in Ghana[1], the absence of codification of the law of contempt in Ghana does not in itself violate the principle that there must not be crime or punishment except in accordance with fixed or pre‑determined law. This is because the charge of contempt of court in Ghana rests in the concept of the public defiance that accompanies the charge of contempt. To establish contempt in Ghana the Applicant must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused defied or disobeyed a court order, with intent, knowledge or recklessness as to the fact that the public disobedience will tend to depreciate the authority of the court.
[2]. As previously stated by this Court[2] ‘contempt of court is the big stick of civil litigation and because of the serious nature of a contempt finding, a finding should be made sparingly and only in the clearest cut of cases. A direct intention to disobey a Court order or an act to prejudice a pending application is required and it ought to be a willful disregard of the order or prejudice the outcome of a pending suit in the Court’[3].
[3] By a Motion on Notice filed at the registry of this court on October 2, 2018, the Applicant herein is praying the Court to use the “big stick” against the Respondents, “for an order to commit the Respondents herein for Contempt of this Honourable Court”.
[4] 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.”
ii. So what constitutes contempt in Ghana?
[5] In R v SITO I; EX PARTE FORDJOUR (2001-2002) SCGLR 322 the Supreme Court 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 contemnor knew what precisely he was expected to do or abstain from doing; and
c) that he