|
MANY criminal lawyers often make
the rule of practice laid down by
the West African Court of Appeal
in R. v. Abisa Grunshie1 the sheet
anchor of their defence whenever
confronted with the issue of the
admissibility of confession
statements especially in murder
cases. The rule of practice is2:
“It has been pointed out ad
nauseam by the courts in this
country that the proper procedure
in taking voluntary statements
from prisoners, especially
confession statements in murder
cases by the police, is to require
the presence of an independent
civilian witness who should sign
the statement at the relevant
time.”
It was on the basis of this rule
of practice that in the recent
murder case of Gyedu v. The
Republic3, counsel for the
appellants contended that the
absence of an independent civilian
witness rendered the recording of
police statements by the accused
bad and therefore inadmissible and
that the trial judge had erred in
not directing the jury to
disregard such statements as
wrongly admitted. Counsel further
argued that the absence of an
independent civilian witness,
preferably literate, who could
have certified the thumbprints of
the accused, made the
admissibility of those statements
questionable. These arguments were
rejected by the Court of Appeal
coram: Apaloo C.J., Edusei J.A.
and Mensa Boison J. The court per
its unanimous decision held per
Mensa Boison J. (as he then was):
“All the same on the question of
the procedure in taking statements
of accused persons, it is enough
to say that the procedure as
enjoined in Abisa Grunshie case
(supra) is a matter of practice
and not law. In a country where
illiteracy is predominant, the
practical difficulty of getting
literate independent civilian
witnesses may be real, especially
in remote parts of the country. To
the existing practice we would
here only add that whenever
practicable the police should
endeavour to get literate
independent civilian witnesses.”
The decision of the Court of
Appeal in the Gyedu case which has
clearly varied the rule of
practice in the Abisa Grunshie
case is in accord with realism; it
lightens the burden placed on
police investigators to look for
literate witnesses in a remote
village where there are simply no
literate persons around. It must
be welcomed.
FOOTNOTES
1. (1955) 1 W.A.L.R. 36.
2. Ibid. at p. 39.
3. Court of Appeal, 31 July 1979,
to be reported in [1980] G.L.R.,
digested in [1980] G.L.R.D. 57. |
