June 19, 2024
SUPREME COURT
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Supreme Court appeal concerns whether criminal cases must start de novo upon judicial reassignment and the scope of appellate interference with a trial judge’s discretion. The Appellant, former CEO of Cocobod, faced multiple economic crime charges in the High Court, Accra. After a prima facie ruling and the trial judge’s retirement, a new judge ordered a de novo trial despite the Republic’s request to adopt prior proceedings. The Court of Appeal reversed, directing adoption and continuation, and the Appellant appealed. The Supreme Court held that any rigid, blanket de novo practice is not binding precedent; Ex Parte Opuni’s comments were obiter. It endorsed Agyemang v Anane’s discretionary framework and the 2024 Practice Direction favouring adoption absent risk of miscarriage of justice. The Court found the trial judge’s discretion arbitrarily exercised, rejected demeanour as dispositive under section 80, and affirmed the Court of Appeal, dismissing all grounds.
DARKO ASARE JSC:
1. My Lords, the fundamental question argued upon the hearing of this appeal is one of some considerable importance. It touches closely the question whether de novo proceedings are obligatory in criminal cases upon judicial reassignment, and whether it constitutes a longstanding judicial practice that has been entrenched by precedent and can only be overturned by statute.
2. The appeal before us stems from a judgment of the Court of Appeal wherein the learned Justices of Appeal reversed the trial court’s decision to commence the instant case de novo, following reassignment to the current trial Judge after the previous trial Judge’s retirement.
3. The facts germane to this appeal have been adequately set out in the judgment of the Court of Appeal, and we would only highlight the salient points necessary for the determination of the issues raised in this appeal.
4. At the criminal trial pending in the High Court, Accra, the Appellant a former Chief Executive Officer of Cocobod has been charged together with two others on various counts including abetment of crime, defrauding by false pretences and willfully causing financial loss to the state of Ghana. The trial of the Accused persons commenced in 2018, and at the close of the Prosecution’s case, the
trial court ruled that the Prosecution had established a prima facie case against the Appellant and the other accused persons in respect of most of the charges preferred against them, whereupon they were ordered by the trial court to open their defence. After a series of unsuccessful applications both before the trial court and the Supreme Court, the Appellant finally opened his defence.
5. During the course of the trial, the then presiding trial Judge proceeded on retirement and the case was reassigned to a different trial Judge. At that stage, the Respondent applied for the proceedings to be adopted and for the suit to take its normal course. This application was however vigorously resisted by the Appellant who urged the trial court to start the trial de novo. After hearing submissions by learned Counsel for the Parties, the learned trial Judge expressed himself as having found favour with the position taken by the Appellant. He directed that the case be started de novo. Obviously aggrieved and dissatisfied with the decision of the trial court the Respondent successfully lodged an appeal to the Court of Appeal.
6. The Court of Appeal upheld the Respondent's appeal, set aside the r