Amidu Vrs Attorney General [2015] GHASC 119 (1 December 2015)

Amidu Vrs Attorney General [2015] GHASC 119 (1 December 2015)

Section 104(4) of Act 30 is inconsistent with articles 14(1) and 19(11) of the 1992 Constitution because it imposes imprisonment for default on a recognizance, which is a civil debt, without defining a criminal offence. The provision violates the constitutional safeguards against arbitrary deprivation of liberty and conviction for undefined offences.

Citation
[2015] GHASC 119
Parties
Plaintiff: Martin Kpebu; Defendant: Attorney-General
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
1 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim allowed; section 104(4) of Act 30 struck down as unconstitutional.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Constitution, Forfeiture of Recognizance, Imprisonment for Civil Debt, Fundamental Human Rights
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Procedure Civil Procedure Interpretation of Constitution Forfeiture of Recognizance Imprisonment for Civil Debt Fundamental Human Rights

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin Kpebu

Plaintiff

Attorney-General

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 104(4) of the Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) is inconsistent with articles 14(1) and 19(11) of the 1992 Constitution and therefore unconstitutional

Ratio Decidendi

Section 104(4) of Act 30 is inconsistent with articles 14(1) and 19(11) of the 1992 Constitution because it imposes imprisonment for default on a recognizance, which is a civil debt, without defining a criminal offence. The provision violates the constitutional safeguards against arbitrary deprivation of liberty and conviction for undefined offences.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim allowed; section 104(4) of Act 30 struck down as unconstitutional.

Orders

  • Section 104(4) of the Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) is struck down as being contrary to and inconsistent with articles 14(1) and 19(11) of the 1992 Constitution.