Mobilla Soldiers At Supreme Court

    0
    15

    Yaw Appiah and Modzaka Eric, the two soldiers who are being tried in connection with the murder of Alhaji Issa Mobilla, former Northern Regional Chairman of the Convention Peoples’ Party (CPP), have gone to the Supreme Court in an attempt to stop the trial Judge, Justice Senyo Dzamefe, from further hearing their case.

    The soldiers have filed a motion at the Supreme Court to prevent the judge from hearing the case any further as they are afraid they might not get justice, insisting that the trial judge had not been given any mandate by the Chief Justice to continue hearing the matter.

    When the case was called at the Supreme Court, the Attorney-General’s Department sent a representative to tell the court that the chief state attorney in the case, Penelope Ann Mamattah, was indisposed, and prayed that the case should be adjourned.

    The presiding judge, Justice Sophia Akuffo, said the state should have sent someone to represent Ms Mamattah, adding that the court would not tolerate such conducts.

    She subsequently adjourned the case sine die. Mr. Thadeus Sory was counsel for the applicants. Other judges in the case were Justices S.A. Brobbey, Anin Yeboah, B.T. Aryeetey and S. Gbadegbe.

    At the last hearing in the substantive case, the judge had asked the two parties their opinions on whether or not he should hear the case afresh as the indisposed juror whose absence had left the court with no option than to start the case afresh, had recovered.

    The judge is expected to give his verdict on whether or not he would start the case afresh. Justice Dzamefe, who empanelled a new jury to hear the case just before the indisposed juror recovered, wanted to find out if the old jury should be made to continue hearing the case or whether the newly empanelled jury should start.

    The prosecution and defence counsel differed widely on the trial. While the state wanted the old jury to continue hearing the case so as to avoid unnecessary expenses in bringing witnesses from Tamale, the defence counsel wanted the new jury, which had already been sworn in.

    The judge said when he referred the case to the Chief Justice (CJ) for advice after the new jury was sworn in, the CJ referred the case back to him, saying he should give his ruling on it because it was not an administrative matter.

    The Judge sought the advice of the CJ after Thadeus Sory, a few months ago, raised objections to question the judge’s impartiality in administering justice to his clients as one of them had complained that he feared they might not get justice.

    Mr. Sory said the case was a priority one since the National Democratic Congress (NDC) government, even before coming to power, had promised to give it that status.

    He explained that the fact that the judge quickly substituted the indisposed juror without substituting him in other cases in which he was involved as a juror, showed that indeed the case was being given priority as promised.

    Defence counsel said he had not been informed that the CJ had given the judge the green light to start the matter afresh.

    Mr. Sory also said that the elevation of the judge to the Court of Appeal meant that the case, which could not be described as a partly heard one, should have been directed to the Chief Justice for a decision to be taken on the trial as the judge was no more a High Court Judge.

    He noted that until that was done, the court could not be said to be properly constituted in accordance with Article 139 (1) of the 1992 Constitution and the judge “had no jurisdiction to hear the matter.” However, Penelope Ann Mamattah, the chief state attorney in the case, said she did not think the case was new even though it was starting afresh.

    Read more:
    Mobilla Soldiers At Supreme Court