Cutting necks and lying prostrate

One sage has remarked notably that “there is no saint without a past and no sinner without a future.” This is a fact that our politicians must learn in their dealings with the general public.  They must know that our people have matured in their political decision-making processes.

While sycophancy and fundamentalism would not be erased completely from our political life, those who are not committed to any political party are critical in any electoral success.

While we cannot discount history in our democratic march, we should not be enmeshed in the past as if we cannot change positively. But in all things we must be reminded by the saying of our elders that “when you are eating the palm of the monkey, be reminded of your own.”  Former US President Bill Clinton also reminds us that “if you live long enough you will make mistakes. But if you learn from them you will be a better person.”

The question of nolle prosequi is known to the judicial process, as much as the principle of plea bargaining. But when the benefits go to our opponents we complain. Sometimes the basis of the complaint can be justified,  but at other times there are public interest considerations in resorting to these legal principles.

During the last general election, there was the case of the Muntie Three, convicted of undermining the course of justice and the integrity at the Supreme Court. Following interventions from party activists including Ministers of State, the three convicts were pardoned by the President.  Judging from the signatories to the petition, it is possible that if the three had not been cited for contempt by the Supreme Court, and the matter left with the Attorney General, no charges would have been preferred against them.

 That the pardon was unpopular can be summed up in the fact that those who spoke against it before it was granted included Lawyer Tony Lithur, senior member of the National Democratic Congress and Counsel to the President in the Presidential Election Petition. I do not know of anyone within the New Patriotic Party who approved of the pardon. The generality of the NDC welcomed the move as desirable and constitutional, lawful and legitimate.

Less than a year down history, there is the matter of eight persons who were arrested for aiding the escape of members of the Delta Force who were standing trial before a Kumasi Circuit Court. The eight appeared before a Circuit Court and were discharged on nolle prosequi, for want of evidence, a proper and legitimate legal principle and there is uproar with innuendo suggesting that there has been political interference in the course and cause of justice.

Despite the fact that the crime of aiding the unlawful escape took place before a Circuit Court, there are lawyers who are arguing animatedly that the eight should have been charged for contempt. In the first place, contempt is not one of the crimes defined in the law and for which a penalty has been prescribed. In that wise the Constitution clearly states under Article 19(11) that “No person shall be convicted of a criminal offence unless the offence is defined and the penalty for it is prescribed in a written law.”

The matter does not end there as Article 19(12) provides a strong exception by submitting that “Clause (11) of this article shall not prevent a Superior Court from punishing a person for contempt of itself notwithstanding that the act or omission constituting the contempt is not defined in a written law and the penalty is not so prescribed.”

The Constitution under Article 126 (1) (a) defines the Superior Courts of Judicature as comprising the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and High Court or Regional Tribunal. There is no place for a Circuit Court to commit for contempt.

“Akyea na emmui” to wit it is bent but not broken, our elders say, is more than any proverb. In law this statement can be equated to what is voidable. What is important is that the eight were discharged not acquitted. What it means is that for as long as they were charged for criminal conduct, there is no time limit as to when if enough evidence is gathered that would establish their guilt beyond all reasonable grounds, they cannot be arrested and prosecuted.

 We should thus all work towards ensuring that justice is done and not just seen to be done. More importantly, we must all now agree that when it comes to the national interest and the cause and course of justice, no individual is above the state, not that of the NPP or the NDC.