GraciousNews
US-based Ghanaian Lawyer and political activist, Pof. Stephen Kwaku Asare popularly known as Kwaku Azar has lashed heavily at Justice Bright Acquah of the Circuit Court, Accra for his poor handling of the Abronye case. In article published on his Facebook page on Sunday, Kwaku Azar underscored the need for judges, in their judgements, to “state the facts; state law; apply the law to the facts, and make a conclusion.” Adding that, “Those are the only grounds. Not Orwell. Not Mugabe.
Why can’t our circuit judges keep it simple Instead of entertaining us with Orwell, Mugabe, or tortured claims of “consistency” (I remanded Ankrah for insulting the former President, so I must remand Abronye for accusing the IGP), a judge faced with a bail application only has to do four things:
1. State the facts.
2. State the law.
3. Apply the law to the facts.
4. Conclude.That’s it. Four steps. Nothing more.
The facts in bail applications are always simple. The accused, Mr. X, is charged with two counts of misdemeanour arising from statements made during a public broadcast. He has applied for bail. The prosecution opposes the application. That’s it. Judges should not extrapolate into “national security” or matters not on the charge sheet.The law itself is not complicated. Section 96(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code says bail may be refused “if there is credible evidence that the accused may abscond, may interfere with witnesses or the conduct of investigations, or may commit the offence again.” Bail is the default position unless one or more of these conditions are proved. Those are the only grounds. Not Orwell. Not Mugabe. Not judicial consistency. Just those three.Now look how simple it is:Example
1: Bail The accused is a public figure, lives in Accra, and has previously honoured police invitations. No evidence was shown that he would abscond, interfere with witnesses, or reoffend. Bail is therefore granted, subject to conditions. Example 2: Bail Denied The accused has previously threatened a key witness and has a record of failing to appear in court. There is credible evidence he may abscond and interfere with investigations. Bail is therefore refused. Quick. Clear. Predictable. Judgments should not be stages for literary display or political theatre. They should be grounded in the law and the facts. Every time a judge strays into Orwell or Mugabe, public trust in the courts shrinks. When judges stick to Section 96(5), justice is done and seen to be done. We have our comprehension issues. Don’t compound them with Orwell and Mugabe. PS:Yɛde post no bɛto hɔ. Yɛnyɛ comprehension consultants. Da Yie!
