November 30, 2022
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In a criminal trial in the High Court (Criminal Division) in Accra (Case No. CR/0264/2022), the prosecution sought to adopt the witness statement of Richard Takyi-Mensah (PW1) as evidence in chief against James Gyakye Quayson, the sitting Member of Parliament for Assin North, who faced charges including deceit of public officer, forgery of passport/travel certificate, knowingly making false declaration, perjury and false declaration for office. Defense counsel objected to paragraphs 514, contending PW1 lacked personal knowledge under section 60(1) of the Evidence Act. The High Court overruled the objection and adopted PW1s statement. Quayson applied to the Supreme Court for certiorari and prohibition to quash the ruling. The Supreme Court, per Owusu (Ms.) JSC, held that section 60(1) is permissive, section 60(2) allows proof of personal knowledge by other evidence, cross-examination will test truth and personal knowledge, and the High Court acted within jurisdiction. Both applications were dismissed.
OWUSU (MS.) JSC:-
On the 12th of July, 2022, the High Court (Criminal Division) (3) Accra, in the course of hearing the case in which the applicant is the accused person on trial, ruled as follows:
“As rightly submitted by the prosecution, the said witness is competent to testify in this matter and his evidence is relevant to their case and same is admissible. As also rightly submitted by counsel for the accused person, a witness may not testify to a matter unless sufficient evidence is introduced to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. The said witness has made certain positive statements in his witness statement. Having made such statements which be his evidence in chief, it is presumed that he has personal knowledge of what he is testifying to. Whether what he has stated therein are matters he knows can only be determined under cross examination to rebut that presumption. It is only after a piece of evidence has been tested under cross examination that the court will know whether what he says will assist the court to determine a fact in issue. The objection is therefore overruled. The witness statement of PW1 filed on the 15th of March, 2022 is adopted as his evidence in chief”.
The above ruling followed an objection raised by counsel for the accused, the applicant in the instant application in the course of his trial in Case No. CR/O264/2022 at the High Court. The prosecution at the High Court had sought to adopt the witness statement of PW1 Richard Takyi-Mensah, as his evidence in chief. Counsel for the accused, the applicant in this application objected and the basis of the objection was that the witness, PW1 who says he is a teacher resident at Yamoransa does not have personal knowledge of the matters in paragraph 5 to 14 of his witness statement and certainly cannot speak from personal knowledge as application for Ghanaian passports are not made by teachers in Yamoransa among other things. Counsel referred to section 60 (1) of the Evidence Act 1975 (NRCD 323).
The prosecution responded to the objection raised and submitted that the objection has no basis as section 60 (1) of the Evidence Act is not couched in mandatory terms. Secondly, per section 60 (2) of the Evidence Act, the evidence to prove personal knowledge of the matter may but need not consist of the testimony of the witness himself. The matters raised by the witness in his witness statement, he has talked about the manner in which the passport of t