Saturday, November 6, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)
THE Human Rights Division of the Fast Track High Court yesterday granted bail to Amina Mohammed, the 24-year-old woman at the centre of the controversial Ejisu robbery and rape story.
She was granted bail in the sum of GH¢5,000 with a surety by the court, presided over by Mr Justice Paul U. Dery, after her lawyers had prayed the court to grant her bail.
The accused person was on Tuesday, November 2, 2010 refused bail and remanded by the Accra Circuit Court to reappear on November 9, 2010, but her lawyers on Wednesday afternoon filed an application for bail on her behalf at the Human Rights Court.
Granting the application for bail after the defence team and prosecution had advanced their arguments, the court held that charges levelled against Amina were misdemeanours and, therefore, bail ought to be granted.
The court directed Amina, who has been charged with two counts of publishing false news with intent to cause fear and panic and deceit of public officer to avail herself for trial.
She was not present in court.
Amina was alleged to have gone on radio stations last week to claim that she was a passenger on board a Tamale-bound bus in which female passengers were raped en masse by the men on board on the order of gun-wielding robbers on October 11, 2010.
She was alleged to have claimed that among the victims was a father who was made to have sex with his 14-year-old virgin daughter.
However, according to the prosecution, police investigations later revealed there was a near robbery at Ejisu in the Ashanti Region but the driver of the bus managed to escape that attack to report the matter to the police.
According to the police, her story caused extensive panic and fear among Ghanaians.
Making a case for his client at the court’s sitting in Accra yesterday, Mr Andy Appiah-Kubi informed the court that Amina was taken into police custody on October 30, 2010 and put before court 72 hours later instead of the mandatory 48 hours as stipulated by the 1992 Constitution.
Counsel argued that Amina was detained beyond 48 hours contrary to Article 14 (3) of the Constitution, which provides that a person shall be brought before court within 48 hours after arrest, restriction or detention.
He also argued that the police took statements from Amina without cautioning her as to her right to keep silent and to counsel and deceived her into believing she was a potential witness only to be turned into an accused person.
Mr Appiah-Kubi submitted that the evidence put forward by the prosecution did not suggest that Amina was among perpetrators of the crime, adding that she was also a victim and it was, therefore, unfortunate for the police to treat her in such a manner, especially after she had given them vital information as an informant.
According to counsel, Amina had never had a brush with the law, was a responsible mother of three, had substantial sureties to stand in for her when granted bail and would avail herself for trial.
He also submitted that Amina was most interested in pursuing the case to its logical conclusion in order to prove to all that the mass rape and robbery indeed took place.
Responding to the prosecution’s affidavit in opposition, counsel submitted that the prosecution attacked the processes filed by the defence counsel instead of reacting to the substance of the bail application.
He said the inaction of the prosecution concerning the bail application amounted to agreeing with the averments of the defence team.
Mr Appiah-Kubi said the accused person had been unlawfully treated by the state and for that reason the court should use its powers to protect the accused person.
Responding, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Ms Gertrude Aikins, said the prosecution asked for the detention of the accused person because it feared for her life, adding that “if we do not get thanked for protecting her, her safety will be on counsel”.
Her response drew a sharp rebuttal from Mr Appiah-Kubi, who questioned whether all persons had to be in custody before they could enjoy protection from the state.
The court earlier overruled a preliminary objection from the prosecution over the legal processes adopted by the defence team in filing its case.
When contacted, the lead counsel for Amina, Professor Ken Attafuah, told the Daily Graphic that the court’s ruling had been served on the Nima Divisional Command, where Amina was being kept.
He said the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) Headquarters had also been served while the surety for Amina was on standby to sign the necessary documents.
No comments:
Post a Comment