|
Contempt of Court: Akufo-Addo supports
punishment for culprits
By Dr. Michael J.K. Bokor
Sunday, June 30, 2013
In rebutting the verbal attacks launched on Justice Atuguba and
the Supreme Court by detractors criticizing them for infringing
on freedom of expression, I have said that their vitriol is
misplaced.
I have also drawn their attention to the fact that the Supreme
Court won’t sit down unconcerned for them to hijack the NPP
petition before it for trial at the bar of public opinion. It is
only by enforcing the contempt of court injunction/prohibition
that the Court can discipline public discourse and attitude
toward the issue.
This move by the Supreme Court isn’t new or strange. That is why
all the noise being made against Justice Atuguba and the Supreme
Court in this particular case is baseless. To refresh the
memories of these NPP people crying themselves hoarse against
Justice Atuguba, here is something from the records:
In the case involving the REPUBLIC versus LIBERTY PRESS LTD. AND
OTHERS [1968] GLR 123–138, Chief Justice Edward Akufo-Addo, on
the instruction of Attorney-General Victor Owusu, had this to
say:
“It must be appreciated by the press and all other
freedom-lovers that without a judiciary strong, courageous and
respected that can effectively protect the freedom which we all
love so much, all talk about freedom, whether it be in the
lecture room or at Bukom Square, remains no more than a mere
metaphysical speculation, and the courts are entitled to look
upon men such as are before me today to help them in the
acquisition of the requisite strength, courage and respect.
“One of the surest ways of doing so is to refrain from
commenting on proceedings which are pending in the courts. For
these constitute some of the most fruitful fields of contempt.
There is however no law which prohibits absolutely any such
comments, but there is law which punishes if the limits set by
law are transgressed, as indeed they have been transgressed in
this case.
“I have stated that the courts are not above criticism but the
courts will not allow themselves to be subjected to pressures
emanating from irresponsible and romantic criticisms.”
Self-explanatory reason for anyone not to discount or discredit
the contempt of court injunction? This loud and clear message
came from one of the accomplished legal brains of the “Mate Me
Ho” camp whose son is today fighting himself lame, trying to
become Ghana’s President through the backdoor, using the dark
chambers of the Supreme Court and not the polling booths or
ballot papers! And it is his political camp (the NPP) that is
flexing muscles to confront the Supreme Court in the performance
of its legitimate function in the enforcement of the contempt of
court clause!!
I see nothing wrong with how the Court has begun dealing with
errant public commentators and will encourage Justice Atuguba
and his team not to relent until they stamp their full control
over the matter so everything is taken through the judicial
process for determination and conclusion. Those making unguarded
public comments on the case being heard by the Supreme Court can
chafe all they want for being noticed and slated for “trial” and
consequent punishment. Their supporters can do same, but the
Supreme Court is right in doing what it has taken upon itself to
do.
Unrestrained public comment on the petition being heard—and the
ongoing personal attacks on Justice Atuguba and the Court—is
more dangerous than the actions being taken by the Supreme Court
to instill discipline in public discourse about the petition and
the Court’s own work. Obviously, the fact that public discourse
continues to be poisoned by the bitter rivalry between the NDC
and the NPP—which has invariably been extended to include
scathing attacks on the Supreme Court itself—suggests that the
situation is getting out of hand and only drastic action can
reverse the trend. That drastic action lies in the enforcement
of the contempt of court clause by the Supreme Court; hence, its
dealing with the Sammy Awuku and those now to face it on
Tuesday. Anybody else who comes across as flouting the contempt
of court prohibition must be quickly identified and summonsed.
Let’s see who will be bold enough to pooh-pooh the Court!
We have noticed so far that those wrongly perceiving the Supreme
Court’s move as “dictatorial”—with particular emphasis on
Justice Atuguba as their bugbear—are mostly in the camp of the
NPP. They have risen up in defence of Awuku and Ken Kuranchie
(Editor of the Searchlight newspaper) while turning a blind eye
to the two NDC operatives (John Atubiga and Kwaku Boahen) as if
they don’t matter. This is their problem. What is bad for Awuku
and Kuranchie about the Supreme Court’s move that isn’t so for
Atubiga and Boahen to warrant any show of sympathy for them from
these NPP people? Your guess is as good as mine. Political
rivalry is at the core. If it has to do with the fate of their
political opponents, Godspeed for them to damnation; but if the
tide turns against their own interests, then, all hell should
break loose!!
Interestingly, the most loquacious critics of the Supreme
Court’s moves are from the NPP camp. They have mounted the most
strident criticisms and persistently isolated Justice Atuguba
for contemning. They are doing so because it is part of the
grand agenda of undermining the integrity of the Supreme Court,
particularly, Justice Atuguba, who is the President of the
9-member panel hearing the NPP’s petition.
The purpose they want to achieve is simple: to create doubts in
the minds of the NPP followers regarding the atmosphere and
trends about the hearing of their petition so that when the
verdict goes against them, they will move their agitations a
notch higher to notoriety. They are preparing the minds of their
followers to reject such a verdict solely on the basis of “bias”
against the NPP by Justice Atuguba.
We have identified several instances of personal attacks on
Justice Atuguba to confirm this sinister campaign by the NPP
camp. Apart from their initial recrimination against him when
the panel was first constituted to hear their case, they have
given clear indications of their particular discomfiture that
Justice Atuguba is at the helm of affairs. They are unhappy at
his dealings with their counsel, Philip Addison, even when it is
clear that Justice Atuguba hasn’t acted ultra vires!!
Two main perspectives from which they have prosecuted their
anti-Atuguba agenda are clear: on the basis of ethnicity (that
his being a Northerner automatically means that he has an
attachment to President Mahama (also a Northerner) and family
ties (to Dr. Raymond Atuguba, Executive Secretary of President
Mahama) as well as political persuasion (by wrongly associating
Justice Atuguba with the NDC). Thus, anything they can do to
tarnish his image and portray him as “partial” will be snatched
at and used with an unprecedented alacrity. That is why Justice
Atuguba is on their lips for the wrong reason!
They have chosen him for particular vengeance because they want
to “break him down” so he will toe their line. It seems the
going is tough for them and nothing but this arm-twisting
tactics through hot-headed rhetoric can help them achieve their
objective. But that is fast becoming their undoing.
Although Justice Atuguba may be heard intervening at some
moments during proceedings at court or stamping the authority of
the court on the ebb and flow of goings-on, he is not acting
unilaterally for anybody to pinpoint him as a tyrant. He confers
with his fellow panel members on contentious issues and
announces the court’s stance, especially when a ruling is to be
given on any objection raised by the different legal teams.
Thus, his voice is pronounced and his stature prominent, which
his detractors are quick to mistake as the voice of tyranny. I
doubt whether they really are being honest to themselves. If
they are, they should be the first to admit that what they
quickly misconstrue as dictatorship on the part of Justice
Atuguba is a collective stance of the panel of judges hearing
the case. It is their collective decision to crack the whip on
errant public commentators letting their tongues loose in the
mistaken belief that they have unlimited freedom of speech to
enjoy.
Unfortunately for such people, that exercise of freedom of
speech is constrained by the very legal parameters within which
the Supreme Court (or any other court of competent jurisdiction)
functions. Those vainly deriding Justice Atuguba and the panel
of judges for enforcing the contempt of court injunction don’t
really know what they are talking about.
They need to know that the judiciary plays a two-fold role as
far as freedom of speech is concerned. It is a defender of the
very freedom of speech at issue. In the same vein, the judiciary
can enforce legal provisions to not only protect that freedom
but also to give it clout and to ensure that the freedom of
speech is not abused. Protecting and preventing the abuse of
freedom of speech go hand-in-hand and must be recognized as
such.
In this particular case concerning Sammy Awuku and the others
summonsed to appear before the Supreme Court on Tuesday, there
is a clear abuse of that freedom of speech insofar as their
pronouncements infringe the provision on contempt of court.
I support the Supreme Court to the full and will advise those
wasting their time and energy criticizing it to turn their
attention elsewhere. Unless they are intentionally doing so in
concert with the political forces seeking to force a river to
flow upstream, they will listen to reason.
No matter their antics or rabble rousing against the Supreme
Court and Justice Atuguba, nothing will change. Nobody’s back
will be bent by their agitations. Unless the Supreme Court
exercises its powers to curb unwarranted public comments on the
petition and how it is handling matters, the situation will
deteriorate. The Supreme Court shouldn’t be anybody’s plaything
to be toyed with or manipulated anyhow to serve parochial
political interests.
Those criticizing it for doing its legitimate work are wasting
their breath. Those petitioning the Chief Justice to “call the
Court to order” should be told that she can’t do anything to
place the Court at their beck and call. Lawless ness must not be
encouraged. They either learn to respect the law or be dealt
with according to the law!!
I shall return…
Dr. Michael J.K. Bokor
• E-mail: mjbokor@yahoo.com
• Join me on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/mjkbokor
|
