REPUBLIC VRS NUKORNU (15/2022) [2024] GHADC 342 (29 April 2024)

CORAM: IN THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COURT HELD AT PEKI IN THE VOLTA REGION ON THE 29TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024 BEFORE HIS WORSHIP EMMANUEL DAVIES SITTING AS MAGISTRATE. CASE NO. 15/2022 THE REPUBLIC VRS PHILIPPINE AKOS NUKORNU JUDGMENT. Accused was arraigned before this court on 12/08/2021 on a charge of Offensive Conduct, contrary to Section 207 of the Criminal Offences Act, Act 29/60. On a plea of not guilty to the charge, a full trial of matter on its merits was ordered. The brief facts presented by the prosecution were that the complainant is a trader whilst accused is unemployed. Both live i the same vicinity at Kpeve Newtown. They have been at logger heads for the past six months. On 08/07/2021 about 8:30pm, accused stood in front of complainant’s drinking spot and started insulting the complainant without any causes. She further mentioned name of the complainant as Rita and insulted her with words to wit; “You are a prostitute and your legs look like bamboo” in the presence of witnesses. On the same date the case was reported at Kpeve Police station. On 29/07/2021, accused was arrested. In her investigation cautioned statement, 1 she denied the offence. After investigation, accused was charged with the offence and put before this honorable court. Although prosecution at case management conference, prosecution informed court of having served accused with four witness statements, three witnesses were actually made to testify and present witness statements to the court to that effect for cross examination. In her evidence-in-chief PW1 averred as follows; My name is Rita Osei. I live at Kpeve Newtown, I am a trader. I know the accused in this matter. I reported to the police. I have given a witness statement to that effect. WITNESS STATEMENT OF PW1 One Philippine Akos Nukornu has been casting insinuations about me for the past six months. Yesterday 08/07/2021 about 8:30pm, she started insulting me again. At a point she mentioned my name ‘Rita’ and insulted me as a prostitute, twisted waist woman and my legs are like bamboo. She also said she would insult me till the week end. CROSS EXAMINATION OF PW1 BY ACCUSED Q1. What did you do to me before I insulted you? Answer – You said your boyfriend was buying drinks from me for himself and for others. Q2. Who is the supposed boyfriend who buys drink for himself and for others? Answer – He is Mr. Gershon Mensah. Q3. Do you know Mr. Adoboe who works at the Water works is my husband and we have been in marriage for three years now? 2 Answer – I do not know that you are married to Mr. Adoboe because he is married under Ordinance which I know. I ever attended their wedding celebration. End of cross examination. EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF BY PW2 My name is Bagtsi Peter. I live at Kpeve, I am a farmer. I know both Complainant and accused in this matter. WITNESS STATEMENT OF PW2 On 8/07/2021 at 6:00pm, I came to see my sister Rita Osei in her drinking spot. Whilst staying with her, she started showing a video of the Late T.B Joshua’s funeral on her cell phone. I watched some parts of the video. While I was watching, one Nukornu Akos passed by and returned to stand in front of the drinking spot. She uttered some words to wit, ‘Ashawo woman who went to Nigeria for ashawo and further intended to use your own child for spiritual money’. After that, she left but my sister Rita did not say anything. Q1. When you heard me insulting the Complainant, what did you say? Answer – I did not say anything. Q2. I am putting it to you that what you said is not true. Answer – What I said is really true that you came to insult my sister. End of cross examination. EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF BY INVESTIGATOR I am Detective Inspector So-Mensah, stationed at Kpeve Police station. I know the complainant as well as the accused person in the dock. A case of Offensive conduct was 3 reported to me for investigation. In the course of my investigation I cautioned and charged the accused person. Investigator’s witness statement reads as follows; On 08/07/2021 at 0920 hours, a case of Offensive conduct was reported by complainant Rita Osei at the station against the accused Philippine Akos Nukornu. I therefore obtained statements from the complainant as well as other possible witnesses in the case. On 29/07/2021 Philippine Akos Nukornu was arrested after which I obtained investigation cautioned statement from her. I accompanied both complainant and accused to the scene of the crime in front of “All shall pass Drinking and Provision Shop” at Kpeve Newtown. The shop is situated at the side of Kpeve Newtown motor road on which accused person stood in the front of the shop and uttered abusive words to the hearing of the complainant and witnesses in the shop. I therefore obtained charged statement from accused. In her statement, she stated that she only walked through the front of complainant’s shop. After investigation, I arraigned accused before Peki Magistrate Court for the offence as stated on the charge sheet. CROSS EXAMINATION OF INVESTIGATOR BY ACCUSED. Q1. I used the road but it’s not true I insulted the complainant. Answer – The evidence I gathered indicated you insulted the complainant. Accused says she has no further questions. At the close of the case for the prosecution accused was called upon to open her defence. Accused in her defence averred she is 4 CROSS EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED BY PROSECUTOR From the evidence adduced, issues outlined for determination are; i. Whether or not accused was at the scene of the crime on the aforementioned date and time. ii. Whether or not the accused provoked the complainant as charged. iii. Whether or not accused person’s behavior amounted to offensive conduct as charged and contrary to Section 207 of Act 29/60. iv. Whether or not accused is guilty of the offence for which she stands charged. To resolve the above I would begin with the analysis of the first issue, that is whether or not the accused was at the scene of the crime on the aforementioned time and date. From the brief facts 0n 08/07/2021 as about 8:30pm accused was alleged to have stood in front of complainant’s drinking spot and started insulting her without any causes,. In the entire evidence before the court, PW1 in her evidence-in-chief averred same date and time accused started insulting her. That at a point she mentioned PW1’s name and insulted as a prostitute, twisted waist woman and her legs are like bamboo. That she also said she would insult her till that week ended. Judicial notice is taken of the fact no mention was made here regarding the crime scene. PW2 testified, he went see his sister Rita Osei in her drinking spot. That while staying with her she started shouting a video of the late T.B Joshua’s funeral on her cell phone. That he watched some parts of the video. That while he was watching, one Nukornu Akos passed by and returned to stand in front of the drinking spot. 5 That she uttered some words to wit ‘Ashawo woman who went to Nigeria for ashawo and further intended to use her child for ritual money’. After that, accused left but complainant did not say anything, the third prosecution witness PW3 was the investigator who among others testified he took both accused and complainant to the crime scene being in-front of “All shall pass Drinking and Provision shop” at Kpeve New Town. That the shop is situated at the side of Kpeve New Town motor road on which the accused person stood in front of the shop and uttered abusive words to the hearing of complainant and witnesses in the shop. I find as a fact that unlike PW1, PW2 and PW3 corroborated as to the crime scene. That from the averments, the acts which has brought them in court took place in the frontage of the shop mentioned above. In the opinion of this court accused went to the crime scene at the time and date stipulated. Issue i. is resolved to the effect that accused actually did go to the scene of the crime. This also proved in the cross examination of PW3’s question 3. Now since issue ii deals with whether or not accused provoked complainant as charged. Here, in evidence by PW1, PW2 and PW3, it could be found all averred accused uttered abusive words to the hearing of witnesses present at that time. In the Socio-cultural environment pertaining to Ghana such words if said of another without cause have the tendency to elicit reprisal in chaotic manner to disturb the public peace. In cross examination of PW1, accused did not pose questions that will challenge and erase matters of abusive words which are provocative as all were not relevant as expected under Section 10(2) of the NRCD 323 which requires accused to throw doubt as to the utterance of same to negative such evidence. Similarly in her cross examination of PW2, accused rather shot herself in the foot, which confirms she issued abusive words. In question 1 she asked Q1. When you heard me insulting the complainant, what did you say? This confirms her act of insult simpliciter. To 6 this PW2 answered; “I did not ask you anything”. In question 2 accused said Q2. “I am putting it to you that what you said is not true” the answer given by PW2 here was; what I said is really true that you came to insult my sister. In the view of this court it is expected that if such averment is not true, accused should powerfully attack same by use of potent questions to discredit same. Accused ought to have demonstrated her innocence convincingly. Above all PW3’s evidence-in-chief also pointed to what I find as fact that abusive words were said of Complainant. In her cross examination of PW3, accused in her question said Q1. I used the road but its not true I insulted complainant. Here if not through good questions needed to be posed to buying his evidence down in proof; moreso at a time he answered; the evidence I gathered indicated you insulted the Complainant. In a nutshell the evidence that accused is priver beyond a reasonable doubt, I find as a fact. The third issue for resolution is whether or not accused person’s behavior amounted to offensive conduct as charged and contrary to Section 207 Act 29/60. In this Judicial notice it is taken of the fact that in time of peace, where Complainant was in her shop and without reasonable cause accused went there, stood in front of the said shop, in the presence or sight and hearing of witnesses rained such unpalatable words against the Complainant was uncalled for. No well well meaning individual would find such pleasant. It is more important that we do our best as humans to co-exist in peace and harmony. I find as a fact that such words are provocative and have the propensity to throw the peace of the place into chaos had complainant not restrained or comported herself. 7 The final issue for determination is whether or not accused is guilty of the offence for which she stands charged. Judicial notice is taken here of the fact that the peace and tranquility of the human environment is paramount. Since the event is an unwarranted one, accused has no excuse to conduct herself in such a manner. And as accused person’s conduct is that society abhors or frowns upon, I find the accused guilty under the circumstances. The prosecution in the view of court discharged its burden of proof. Section 13(1) of the Evidence Act provides “In any Civil or Criminal action the burden of persuation as the commission by a party of a crime which is directly in issue requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt”. In the English case of Miller Vrs Minister of Pensions 1947 1AER 372 at 373 Lord Denning MR held: “Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond a shadow of doubt. The law would fail to protect the community if it admitted fanciful positions to deflect the course of justice. If the evidence is strong against a man as to leave only a remote possibility in his favor which can be dismissed with a phrase ‘It is possible but not the least probable the case is proved beyond reasonable doubt but nothing short of that will suffice”. SGN H/W EMMANUEL DAVIES MAGISTRATE. 8