Court of Appeal quashes Nii Sasraku’s conviction

The Court of Appeal has quashed the conviction of Nii Anyisah Sasraku III, the head of the Nii Arde Nkpa family of James Town, for contempt of court.

According to the court, it found no justification for the conviction of Nii Sasraku, since the act of contempt complained of must be “a deliberate frustration of the effort of the court to protect justice from interference.”

Conviction

The Accra High Court, presided over by Mrs Justice Elizabeth Ankumah, on June 14, 2013 found Nii Sasraku guilty of contempt of court and sentenced him to a month’s imprisonment.

His conviction followed a motion on notice brought against him and one other person by Rev. Nii Tackie Tagoe and Daniel Nii Ade Tagoe that prayed the court to commit them to prison custody for contempt until they purged themselves by refraining from any pronouncements on the issues before the court or interfering in any way with the proceedings before the court.

The other respondent, Oblempong Kojo Ababio, the James Town Mantse was, however, discharged by the court on grounds that his guilt had not been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Suit

Nii Ayinsah Sasraku, known in private life as Mr Emmanuel Nii Adjei Osekere, had earlier filed a suit at the court, seeking a declaration that he was the lawful, recognised and substantive head of the Nii Arde Nkpa family.

He also sought a declaration that Rev. Nii Tackie Tagoe and Daniel Nii Ade Tagoe were not the head of the Nii Arde Nkpa family and administrator of the family council respectively.

He had further prayed for an order of perpetual injunction to restrain them from carrying themselves as the respective head of family and administrator.

In the same suit, the two respondents made a counter claim for declarations that Nii Sasraku had not been appointed and or elected as the head of the family and prayed the court to restrain him from holding himself out as head of the Nii Arde Nkpa family.

Interlocutory injunction

Before trial of the suit could commence, however, the trial court in a ruling in an application for interlocutory injunction filed by Nii Sasraku held that he (Nii Sasraku) had not been appointed head of the family, and at best only acting as the head of family.

Contempt

But in its June 14, 2013 ruling on the contempt case, the High Court found that in an assumed capacity as the head of the family contrary to the High Court ruling, Nii Sasraku wrote to the chief of Plerno, Kokrobite, Lamgma and Tuba, removing him from office.

According to the court, the actions of Nii Ayinsah Sasraku were deliberate, wilful and intended to disparage the image of the court.
Dissatisfied, Nii Sasraku then appealed against the decision.

Appeal court judgement

Quashing the lower court’s decision, however, the Court of Appeal observed that it was only evidence surrounding the acts alleged against Nii Sasraku which constituted those acts into interference in the administration of justice or the lowering of the authority and image of the court that can support the conviction of the appellant for contempt of court.

“And I have not found any justification for the conviction of the appellant. There is no evidence surrounding the purported dismissal of the Mantse of Plerno by the appellant into which an interference in the administration of justice or the lowering of the image of the court may be read,” Mr Justice Aduama Osei, who read the unanimous decision of the court said.

According to the court, neither of the alleged acts had been shown to have frustrated or to have been intended to frustrate the trial court or to have otherwise interfered with the jurisdiction or power of the trial court to determine the matter before it.

It observed that the law of contempt enabled the justice system to protect its integrity so that, with a strong image, it can effectively administer justice in the society.

“One way by which the justice system may lose its integrity is to allow litigants to abuse the contempt procedure. The contempt procedure should not provide an avenue for a litigant to, so to speak, teach a fellow litigant a lesson, when on the facts the integrity of the justice system is not at stake,” the court further held.

The three-member court was presided over by Mrs Justice Mariama Owusu, with Mr Justice Saeed K. Gyan as the other member.