Amend laws for expeditious disposal of galamsey, corruption, economic financial crime cases

In most financial and economic crime cases, such as galamsey, money laundering, cybercrime, corruption, causing financial loss to the State and other organised crimes, the cases may be pending in our courts for months or years before they are determined. 

[2] The Constitution provides under Article 19(1) as follows: “A person charged with a criminal offence shall be given a fair hearing within a reasonable time by a court”.

However, the Constitution has not defined what time frame will amount to a reasonable time.

Causes delays

These delays sometimes arise as a result of numerous adjournments and procedural lapses in our criminal justice system.

Some private legal practitioners and state attorneys rely on the loopholes in our criminal justice system to delay the conclusion of criminal cases for many months and even years. 

Some delays are also due to the filing of numerous interlocutory appeals and applications.

Our criminal justice system entertains so many adjournments and interlocutory applications.

Such as a stay of proceedings pending interlocutory appeal.

Our laws do not have the maximum number of adjournments the prosecution or defence can ask from the court before the conclusion of a criminal case.  

Some of the delays may also be as a result of the fact that the hearing of a criminal case may have to start de novo when the trial judge is transferred, retires, dies or resigns and a new judge takes over the continuation of the case.

The current legal position is that the determination, as to whether a criminal case must start de novo, or to have proceedings adopted, when a new judge takes over from another judge, is entirely within the discretion of the new judge.

Again, a defence counsel may raise constitutional issues as to the propriety or the legality of charges against his client.

The constitutional issue may be raised during the trial before the trial court for reference to the Supreme Court, or before the Supreme Court in respect of charges which have been preferred against his client.

Whenever a constitutional issue that calls for interpretation is raised, the proceedings in the substantive case before the trial court have to be in abeyance, pending the determination of the Constitutional issue.

The determination of the constitutional issue before the Supreme Court can take weeks or months before resolution.

These delays, in some cases, scare people who intend to invest in the country.

These delays make some of the investors think that if someone commits an offence against them as victims, it may sometimes take months or years before they can get justice.

The delays sometimes embolden some people to commit various criminal offences, since they know the trial may not end anytime soon.

Sometimes, complainants, victims and other prosecution witnesses may not even be alive to testify in court because the case might have been delayed for months or years or may have to start de novo before a new judge. 

In our criminal justice system, if the prosecution cannot get its witnesses to testify on behalf of the Republic, the trial court may be compelled to strike out the case for want of prosecution and discharge the accused person.

These delays sometimes lead some people to think that instant justice should be carried out against suspects, which cannot be justified in any way.

Recommendations

The adoption of the measures below, in my view, can serve as a tool to source funds from international organisations, non-governmental organisations, etc., to help in the fight against money laundering, cybercrime, terrorist financing, galamsey activities and other organised crimes.

The measures can also boost the confidence of investors, both local and foreign, in respect of expeditious disposal of criminal cases in situations where they are victims.

These measures can also help the country to quickly recover State funds, which might have been embezzled or misappropriated, since an accused person is likely to be convicted within a short period.

These measures would, therefore, help to effectively implement plea bargaining under our laws.

The writer is a Justice of the Court of Appeal.
To be continued.