REPUBLIC v. ABUSUAPANIN OHENEBA KWAME GYAN & OTHERS
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- CECILIA SOWAH, J.A. (PRESIDING)
- ANTHONY OPPONG, J. A.
- ANGELINA MENSAH-HOMIAH, J.A
Areas of Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
- Criminal Law and Procedure
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Justice Anthony Oppong, JA, writing for the Ghana Court of Appeal, reviewed contempt committals arising from proceedings before the Judicial Committee of the Akuapem Traditional Council involving the queen mother of Atweasin and rival claims to the Atweasin stool. After the High Court in Koforidua convicted and sentenced several appellants based on affidavits, photographs, and a video, the appellants challenged both the sufficiency of proof and the procedure. The Court of Appeal held civil contempt is quasi‑criminal, requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt and, where material facts are denied, further evidence beyond affidavits. It criticized the trial court’s unconventional handling of the video without oral testimony and cross‑examination, found no proof that the ceremony was a re‑installation under customary law, and determined the ceremony did not pre‑empt the Judicial Committee’s adjudication. The Court set aside the committals, acquitted and discharged the appellants, ordered refunds, and dismissed the respondent’s variation application under Rule 15(1) of C.I.19.
ANTHONY OPPONG, J A:
The appellants were attached for contempt at the instance of the respondent at the High Court, Koforidua. The contempt was against the Judicial Committee of the Akuapem Traditional Council which issued a certificate of contempt in accordance with section 33(8) of the Chieftaincy Act, 2008 (Act 758). On the face of the record, there is controversy as to the regularity of the proceedings culminating in the ruling of the Judicial Committee of the Akuapem Traditional Council whereby they certified that the respondents should be prosecuted for contempt at the High Court. The appellants contended that they were not made aware of the hearing date and thus were denied the right to be heard. Since no issue was raised as to the propriety of the certification, the Court would refrain from commenting any further on that matter.
The High Court after listening to arguments for and against the application for contempt committed the appellants and sentenced them. Dissatisfied of the decision of the High Court on the matter, the appellants, that is, the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th filed Notice of Appeal and sought an order setting aside the committal and the sentence. The grounds of the appeal are:
a. The judgment is against the weight of evidence on the record
b. The Court misdirected itself on the legal effect of an abdication of a chief by a letter
c. The committal cannot be supported having regard to the evidence
d. The sentence is harsh and excessive having regard to all the circumstances of the case
e. Other grounds of appeal may be filed upon receipt of the full record of appeal.
Before these grounds would be discussed, looking at the facts giving rise to this appeal will be apposite.
The 4th appellant, Nana Frimpong Kodua II (known in private life as Kwaku Frimpong) who was the chief of Atweasin was alleged to have willingly and voluntarily abdicated his occupation of the Atweasin Amadi Affam Stool as the chief thereof and in his place, the respondent, the queen mother of Atweasin enstooled a new chief in the person of Nana Kwabena Osae Abotow amidst protestations of some other king makers. Those who opposed the installation of the new chief particularly, 1st appellant, the abusuapanin of the royal Ayokoo family of Atweasin, Aburi, petitioned the Judicial Committee of the Akuapim Traditional Council claiming that by virtue the manner the respondent herein went about disregarding custom in purporting to enstool Nana Kw