The spontaneous reaction is enough testimony of how delicate and extremely volatile the issue of the killing of the Overlord of the Ya-Na Yakubu Andani II is.
On Tuesday March 29, 2011 a Fast Track High Court in Accra presided over by Justice E.K. Ayebi acquitted and discharged 15 members of the Abudu royal family of the Dagbon chieftaincy divide, accused by the state of masterminding the killing of the Over Lord of Dagbon.
The country came to a convulsion. Politicians, journalists, serial callers, street agitators all reacted as though Armageddon was here. The Abudus in Yendi poured out onto the streets in jubilation; the Andanis in Tamale poured out in anger and destruction. Just to summarise the disappointment of the Andanis, the regent of Savelugu, Sulemana Mahama, an Andani, in an address during a visit by ex-president Jerry Rawlings over the week-end said the ruling came as a shock to the many Andani youth and evoked fresh memories of the unfortunate killing of the Ya-Na.
In the heat of the skirmishes, comments have been passed – some hailing the judge’s ruling, others cursing it. That is to be expected after any ruling and for a case as complicated as that of the murder of Ya-Na, even stronger emotions for or against the ruling are to be expected. But I guess the country is getting far more than it bargained for.
On Sunday April 3, 2011, the Central Region Propaganda Secretary of the National Democratic Congress and a member of the Board of Electricity Company of Ghana, Allotey Jacobs waded into the volatile issue with these comments he granted to Joy FM.
“You know a lot of the judges were promoted during [former president] Kufuor’s administration.
“He appointed a lot of people into high positions within the judiciary and that was completely a player within that team delivering a birthday cake to Nana Akufo-Addo to motivate him towards the 2012 elections.” (The ruling coincided with the birthday of the opposition leader, Nana Akufo-Addo.)
My first reaction listening to this interview was Jesus Christ! Can it get any more petty, murkier and scandalous than this?
For a government official, not a serial caller to suggest, in fact state, that the judge sitting on such an important case will throw caution to the dogs, put his integrity and years of service on the line and provide a perverse ruling only as a befitting birthday gift for the leader of an opposition party is to say the least preposterous and churlish.
Then on Monday, MP for Yendi, Baba Iddrissu was also quoted to have said that Nana Addo had, during his recent visit to Yendi, promised that when he returned to Accra, the 15 suspects would be acquitted and discharged. Lo and behold they have been acquitted and discharged, he snapped.
Apparently former President Jerry John Rawlings had set the pace in Tamale in what appears to be who-is-who contest in bastardising the judiciary. That is not his first time.
He said: “Today, the Supreme Court – not just the Supreme Court a lot of these court houses – are loaded and packed with corrupt cronies of Kufuor; how do you expect to get justice from some of these corrupt elements.”
These comments are not only meant to bastardize the judge and his ruling but to attack the very sanctity of the judicial process. All right-thinking people, irrespective of party affiliation, position or profession must speak out before this country is consumed by what could potentially be worse than the killing of the Ya-Na and his elders. I do not seek to underestimate the massacre. Nobody in his right senses will.
The incident will forever remain a scar that will linger on the minds of many, especially, the political party under whose reign the incident occurred.
The Andanis seek justice and they are entitled to it; That justice, can only be administered by a court and the state owes it a duty to the Andanis, the Abudus, and Ghanaians as a whole that the justice it seeks to provide is one that is enduring and not one that will satisfy one side of the feud. Justice is necessary, but at what cost? Already one person has been reported dead. No one knows how many will follow if a verdict goes either way on appeal.
merits of the case
I don’t intend to comment on the merits of the case, nor on the propriety or otherwise of the ruling. But if anybody wants to, more importantly, government officials, ex-presidents and politicians as a whole, the comments must be of substance, one that is reasonable and throws light on issues.
It is not enough to say Justice Ayebi erred and leave it at that. One is duty bound to explain to all who care to listen how the ruling is a travesty of justice and why the state has a better chance on appeal. I thought that was what ex-President John Rawlings was doing until I heard him Monday Morning.
But to insinuate consistently that Judge Ayebi sold his conscience and provided a jaundiced ruling, and provide no shred of evidence, other than the hugely discredited and demeaning rants about Kufuor appointments is disingenuously unacceptable and I am being charitable.
It will be interesting to find out who appointed Justice EK Ayebi as a High Court judge. That said, were the many Judges appointed before 2001 by Mr Rawlings in consultation with the Judicial Council all thoughtless dummies who operated on the whims and caprices of Mr. Rawlings?
And oo, President Mills in his 18 months has appointed at least thirty (30) new High Court judges as well as three (3) new Supreme Court judges. These Judges are expected to adjudicate cases no matter who is involved.
For a human institution, the Judiciary cannot be perfect. There may be corruption – in fact there is; Judges may be sympathetic to some lawyers – a fact undeniable, one known and accepted worldwide but the court has self correcting measures to deal with some of these imperfections. Once a lawyer agrees that a particular judge should sit on a case, that lawyer is bound to either accept or disagree with the ruling but not to attack his person or integrity. If the prosecution thought Judge Ayebi is biased and incapable of providing an impartial ruling, there were remedies to cure that mischief. Indeed in this same case, Judge Ayebi came in only as substitute for Justice Anthony Oppong who the deputy Attorney General Ebo Barton Oduro accused of making prejudicial comments at a drinking bar and could not be trusted for a fair trial. The judge recused himself paving the way for Ayebi to be appointed.
If indeed the state was not comfortable with Ayebi as well, it ought to have protested and get him changed as well until it gets one who perhaps was appointed by Mr. Rawlings and who will be ready to do his bidding. Then the people of Ghana, the Abudus, Andanis will have justice and the whole country will move on.
But to agree that Ayebi is competent enough to handle the case and only raise these issues after his ruling is an insult on the intelligence of all Ghanaians.
Such comments are only to serve a one purpose – discredit the judiciary as much as possible, play on the key boards of people’s emotions for them to reject any ruling on appeal if it doesn’t go the way of the state. That is dangerous for our democracy.
With our dark history on the Judiciary, comments like these must be condemned no matter where they are coming from, lest we create breeding grounds for justice dispensed by mob. And for a case of this magnitude with ethnic underpinnings the country should not underestimate the harm statements like these will cause.
It behoves on all who wish to comment on this matter to do so in a measured, somber, fair and reasonable manner in order not to hurt the sensibilities of the parties involved and destabilize the judiciary in the process.
I rest my case.
See more here:
Loose Cannons Must Back off Ya-Na’s Ruling