2025
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Supreme Court of Ghana ruling addresses an application for prohibition brought by Kwabena Adu-Boahene, Angela Adjei Boateng, Mildred Donkor, and Advantage Solutions Ltd to restrain a High Court judge (General Jurisdiction “10”, Accra) from continuing their criminal trial (Suit No. CR/0418/2025). The Applicants alleged bias based on four grounds, including pretrial disclosure rulings regarding alleged missing pages of Exhibit “C” (the 4th Accused’s bank statement), the judge’s posture concerning exculpatory evidence, perceived Attorney-General influence over scheduling, and extended daily sittings. The Attorney-General contended Exhibit “C” was complete and relevant to 2023 transactions. The Court restated the discretionary and forward-looking nature of prohibition, the presumption of judicial impartiality, and the need for proof on a preponderance. It found no operative prejudice and held that relevancy/admissibility must be decided at trial under the Evidence Act; accordingly, it struck down the Practice Direction phrases “which are relevant to the case” as unconstitutional and adopted reformulated disclosure provisions. It dismissed all bias grounds and confirmed that prohibition/certiorari and appeal are not mutually exclusive.
RULING
<u>ADJEI, JSC: </u>
The Court, on 29th October, 2025, dismissed the application for prohibition as unmeritorious and adjourned it to 5th November, 2025, for a reasoned ruling to be filed. The Applicant filed an application for prohibition to pray this Court to prohibit the Judge sitting in the High Court, General Jurisdiction “10”, Accra, from proceeding to hear the criminal suit intituled Suit No. CR/0418/2025; The Republic v Kwabena Adu-Boahene, Angela Adjei Boateng, Mildred Donkor and Advantage Solutions Ltd on grounds of bias and real likelihood of bias from four fronds. The grounds for the application were provided as follows:
“(i) His Lordship is caught in a continuing operative bias demonstrated in his prejudgment and/or predetermination of the critical issues of the essence and import of exculpatory evidence in aid of fair trial as spelt out in Article 19 of the Constitution and judicially pronounced upon in the Supreme Court case of Republic v Baffoe-Bonnie & 4 Others [2017-2021] 1 SCGLR 327.
(ii) The posture of His Lordship, John Eugene Nyante Nyadu, J., that he is determined to continue with the trial when he has judicially predetermined that the exculpatory evidence are not relevant to the case and the defence of the Accused Persons/ Applicants, amounts to a real likelihood of bias against the Applicants.
(iii) The Attorney-General’s stampeding of His Lordship, John Eugene Nyadu J., relating to his time in delivering his own decisions and deferring to the Attorney- General’s time dictates is real likelihood of bias against the Applicants.
(iv) A Court of General Jurisdiction having elected to hear the criminal case from 9 am to 4 pm when he sits has shown special extrajudicial interest in the case in which is a real likelihood of bias disqualifying His Lordship from adjudicating the case as an independent justice delivery umpire.
The Applicants recounted the events depicting bias of the judge from the day that they were arrested by the Economic and Organized Crime Office (EOCO) on 30th April, 2025 when they were driven to the Court and ushered into the High Court, General Jurisdiction "10" with their lawyers not knowing that their arraignment before the Court had been prearranged by the Attorney-General, and were served with copies of the charge at the premises of the Court. The lawyers for the Applicants were not properly attired, as they did not