GH - THE REPUBLIC v. THOMAS ASARE EX-PARTE NAA TWAA KOFI

RULING

WOOD (MRS), JA.

The parties in these proceedings are the parties in a suit pending before the Tema High Court, Civil Division presided over by Mrs. Felicity Amoah J. On the 22nd of January 1999, she found the applicant “guilty” of contempt for having disobeyed an interim order made in the course of the pending civil cause. She made the following pronouncement with regard to sentence”:

“I find the respondent guilty and for his contemptuous act he is sentenced to a fine of ¢3 million or in default 3 months imprisonment. ¢2 million of the fine when paid should be given to the applicant as compensation.

The respondent is to pay the fine within 10 days. He is therefore admitted to ball in the sum of ¢3 million with one surety to be justified. I award cost of ¢200,000.00 against respondent.”

Within four days of the order, the applicant, in the exercise of his legitimate rights has appealed against the ruling, the finding that he was in contempt of court and the sentence. He quickly followed it up with a motion for stay of execution pending appeal, which unfortunately the trial court found unmeritorious and consequently dismissed. He is therefore, by this present motion applying for that interim relief, which was, denied him by the court below. The main grounds upon which the appeal was filed and on which also this motion was argued before us, in an attempt to demonstrate that theirs is no frivolous appeal, but one with a very high success rate are the following:—

“(1) That the ruling was an error in law as the applicant was wrongly found guilty for a criminal contempt when the act complained of was, properly speaking in the nature of a civil contempt.

(2) The sentence which was imposed was harsh excessive and oppressive, having regard to the circumstances of the case, particularly when the evidence did not show that the respondent suffered any loss as a result of his alleged continuous acts.”

However, what appeared to be a straightforward, simple and innocuous application raised an interesting procedural issue. The argument raised by the other side in opposition to the application as it stood; is this, since the contemptuous act for which he was found “guilty” and “sentenced” to a fine of or in default a term of imprisonment is in the nature of a quasi criminal offence, having suffered a conviction, the proper course open to the applicant was to appeal to the Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal and follow same up with an application for bail

RULING

WOOD (MRS), JA.

The respondent is to pay the fine within 10 days. He is therefore admitted to ball in the sum of ¢3 million with one surety to be justified. I award cost of ¢200,000.00 against respondent.”

“(1) That the ruling was an error in law as the applicant was wrongly found guilty for a criminal contempt when the act complained of was, properly speaking in the nature of a civil contempt.

THE REPUBLIC v. THOMAS ASARE EX-PARTE NAA TWAA KOFI

Areas of Law