REPUBLIC VRS. COFFIE (CR/0110/2024) [2024] GHAHC 437 (24 October 2024)

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE, IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, CRIMINAL COURT 4, HELD IN ACCRA ON THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024, BEFORE HER LADYSHIP, COMFORT KWASIWOR TASIAME, JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT. CASE NO. CR/0110/2024 THE REPUBLIC VRS 1. SAM NELSON COFFIE - ACCUSED PERSONS 2. KOJO BOTSIO ADUHENE ____________________________________________________________________________ ACCUSED PERSONS: ABSENT COMPLAINANT (SARAH MINTAH) – PRESENT COUNSEL: SETH AWERE-OPANYINYENA(PSA) FOR THE REPUBLIC - PRESENT _____________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL FOR REPUBLIC: I have before the court a motion on notice for the accused persons to be tried in absentia filed on 19th September, 2024. I move in terms of the motion paper and the supporting affidavit. I rely on all my averments as contained in the affidavit in support particularly paragraphs 6-17. Article 19 of the 1992 constitution provides that for a person to be tried in court, he should appear in court for the trial. Upon this, the prosecution has done everything possible by 1 issuing a hearing notice to the accused persons as the documents are attached to the application but they refused that opportunity. Again, we were in this court to apply for an order for bench warrant for the accused persons to be brought to court. the accused persons refused this opportunity by making sure that they evaded arrest. As regards the article 19 (a) and (b) of the 1992 constitution we have made it possible for the accused to appear in court but they have abused those opportunity. He has put himself in a position as I have indicated in my averments. The police were there to arrest him but he told his security to tell the police officers that he was not in town and that he had travelled outside the country. BY COURT: RULING The brief facts of this case are that, a charge sheet has been filed before this court on the 19th day of December, 2023 wherein the accused persons have been charged with the offences of Abetment of crime, namely Causing unlawful damage to property contrary to sections 20 and 172 of the Criminal and Other offences Act, 1960(Act 29). This charge sheet was filed on 1/12/2023 and assigned to this court on 19th December, 2023. The learned State Attorney only came to court with the complainants on 18th April, 2024. The LEARNED Principal State Attorney prayed for Bench Warrant for the arrest of A2 and same granted. On the 7th of May, 2024, when this came on for hearing, the prosecution could not arrest A2 so they prayed the court for Bench Warrant for the arrest of A1 as well and same granted. Accused persons could not be arrested. On 19/09/2024, prosecution filed an application to try the accused person in absentia. The Learned State Attorney moves the Application and relied on Article 19 clause 3 of the 1992 Constitution. Article 19 clause 3 provides that “The trial of a person charged with a criminal offence shall take place in his presence unless: 2 (i) He refuses to appear before the court for the trial to be conducted in his presence after he has been duly notified of the trial or; (ii) He conducts himself in a such a manner as to render the continuation of the proceedings in his presence impracticable and the court orders him to be removed for the trial to proceed in his absence. So, the law provides that, trial in absentia only takes place where accused person decides to absent himself from the trial or proceedings in court after he has been duly notified for the purposes of the application before this court this morning. In order to grant the application before me, the learned State Attorney must prove to the court that the accused persons had been notified and they failed to appear. However, the application and the submissions before the court sought to say that they could not get the accused persons to serve with the Charge sheet or notified personally or through any other means that this case is coming on before the court. In view of that, I think I do not have jurisdiction to proceed with the matter in the absence of the Accused persons. This application is therefore refused. The bench warrant is still in force. This case is adjourned to 25th November, 2024 at 9:00am for the prosecution to put its house in order. (SGD) COMFORT KWASIWOR TASIAME (JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT) 3