![\"Charles](\"http:\/\/4cd.e16.myftpupload.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/11800127_931732360232004_6780929573049340088_n.jpg\")
Starting with the 10 year sentence, if the news account of Mr. Antwi’s arrest is anything to go by, then we know that he was arrested and sent to court on the charge of ‘possession of firearm without lawful excuse’ of which the Small Arms and Ammunition Act of 1972′ states that such a person shall “..be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding c5 million or to imprisonment not exceeding five years or to both.[As amended by the Arms and Ammunition (Amendment) Act, 1996 (Act 519), s.2]” ( section 11, Arms and Ammunitions Act, 1972).<\/p>\n
Thanks to the humanitarian and nationalistic instincts of some lawyers, it didn’t even take a day for us to be educated on this law which only allows for a maximum of 5 years instead of the 10 that was handed down to the accused.<\/p>\n
My point, unless the accused was charged on something different (pardon me for wasting your precious time in that case ) then the ruling hinges on pure illegality and is a clear case of miscarriage of justice, in my view.<\/p>\n
The second issue of illegality that might have come up from the ‘high speed trial’ is that when an accused person pleads not guilty in court, the nature of our judicial system puts the burden of proof on the prosecution based on the ‘ innocent until proven guilty’ principle, as enshrined in Article 19 (2c) of our constitution which says that any person accused of a criminal offence is ‘presumed to be innocent until he is proved or has pleaded guilty’ ( Article 19(2c) of 1992 Constitution).<\/p>\n
It is thus the duty of the court to ensure that he’s been given the right to a fair trial including a fair amount of time to put together facilities that might ensure his defense in court as captured in 19(2e) which states the accused “be given adequate time and facilities for the preparation of this defense’.<\/p>\n
As we know, this was not followed. We are told in news reports that The honorable judge after hearing the not guilty plea of the accused went ahead and started questioning him until he made the confession which is wrongly seen as canceling his earlier plea.<\/p>\n
By this, Mr. Antwi was robbed of his constitutional right of 19(2e), I think. Still on this point, In a radio interview on the issue, the ace legal practitioner, Prof. Ken Attafuah condemned the fact that the judge did not hasten slowly in passing his judgement.<\/p>\n
So, at least my layman’s opinion is not far fetched at all. You know what’s dangerous? The Judge’s refusal to hasten slowly in passing sentence sacrificed certain vital information that could have been helpful to the prosecution, assuming the accused was mentally sound.<\/p>\n
By this, accomplices, if any, are still on the loose and the person who might have given the accused the said gun is also free from the claws of the law.<\/p>\n
My other reservations on this trial which aren’t so much about illegality is the sad issue of the mental state of the accused. It is true that an insane person might not be such coherent in his plans of assassinating a president which we are told dates back to some years after the demise of the most peace loving president our country has ever been blessed with.<\/p>\n
May the soul of the late Professor Mills rest in perfect peace. However, it would do us all a great good if we knew that mental illness comes in various forms and stages as already mentioned by lots of people.<\/p>\n
It is thus sad that the innocent appeal of a lawyer friend of the court after hearing the account of the accused in court that he be given psychiatric check and treatment was rejected by the judge. Apparently, the Judge wasn’t satisfied that the accused had mental issues.<\/p>\n
Again, if the court had hastened slowly as Prof. Attafuah pointed out, the court would have benefitted from the latter account of the brother of the accused who claims to have proved to the BNI that his brother was indeed mentally challenged from several sources as captured in a news account after the trial.<\/p>\n
What really worries me is that if indeed Mr. Antwi is mentally challenged, don’t we think we are being unfair to him as well as putting the lives of the many prisoners in danger by keeping him in a regular prison instead of a mental correctional facility?<\/p>\n
Please hold on to your answer until we meet again on this very issue.
\nThanks.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
By: Kingsley Antwi-Boasiako<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
It’s a shame the way we treat mental issues in our part of the world. What’s interesting is that anyone of us could become victim of mental illness due to several circumstances at any point in time (something I pray against). Mahatma Ghandi once said “There is a higher court than courts of justice and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":20,"featured_media":138467,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[],"tags":[8],"yoast_head":"\n