The plaintiff, Superintendent of Police Mr Ayamga Yakubu Akolgo, is also seeking an order for the court to strike out section 96 (7) of the Criminal and other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) and whatever section of any enactment that prohibits a court from granting bail in the trial of any offence as unconstitutional, void and of no effect.

 

According to Mr Ayamga, who is a chartered accountant and a lawyer, the existence of statutory restrictions in the grant of bail was inconsistent with the principles of the 1992 Constitution, rule of law, justice and respect for human rights.

 

Reliefs

 

The plaintiff is seeking, among other reliefs, a declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 14(3) and (4) of the 1992 Constitution, The Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Decree, 1975 (NRCD 309), which prior to the coming into effect of the Constitution, amended the Criminal and other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) as amended by the insertion of section 96(7) which amendment purports to prohibit a court from the grant of bail in the trial of certain criminal offences is inconsistent with the said Article and, therefore, unconstitutional, void and of no effect.

 

Affidavit

 

In a supporting affidavit to the writ, the plaintiff, who is bringing the action in his capacity as a citizen of Ghana, averred that the Criminal and other offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) as amended is an Act of Parliament which provides for the procedure by which a criminal offence shall be Inquired into, tried and otherwise dealt with.

 

It said the Criminal and other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) as amended has undergone amendments since its first promulgation in 1960 to its present state known as the Criminal and other offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) as amended.

 

According to the affidavit, it had come to the notice of the plaintiff that some of amendments of the Criminal and other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30), as amended, sought and purport to impose a duty on a court not to grant bail to accused persons in some criminal trials.

 

It said the amendments of the Criminal and other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act30) which imposed a duty on a court not to grant bail encapsulates treason, subversion, murder, robbery, narcotics drugs, hijacking, piracy, rape, defilement, escape from lawful  custody and person being held for extradition to a foreign country.

 

It said the first amendment to the Criminal and other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) as amended was the Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Decree, 1975 (N.R.C.D 309) which purports to prohibit a court from the grant of bail in treason, subversion, murder, robbery, hijacking, piracy, escape from lawful custody and person being held for extradition to a foreign country.

 

The second amendment to the Criminal and other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) as amended, it said was the Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Act 2002, (Act 633) which purports to prohibit a court from the grant of bail in rape and defilement cases.

 

The affidavit said the third amendment to the Criminal and other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) as amended was the Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Act 2006, (Act 714) which purports to prohibit a court from the grant of bail in narcotic drug offences.

 

It said these amendments which sought and purport to prohibit a court from the grant of bail are consolidated into section  96(7) of the Criminal and other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) as amended and listed as treason, subversion, murder, robbery, narcotics drugs, hijacking, piracy, rape, defilement, escape from lawful  custody and person being held for extradition to a foreign country.

 

“That I am advised by counsel and verily believe same to be true that the amendments to the Criminal and other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30) as amended which sought and purport to prohibit a court from the grant of bail in any criminal offence are unconstitutional, void and of no effect and ought  to be deleted from each and every statute,” it added.