Mahama Pushed To The Corner

… as NDC Footsoldiers Demand Release Of Montie Gang

By Pascal Kafu Abotsi
Ghana’s President, John Dramani Mahama, is torn between exercising Article 72 of the 1992 Constitution to set free the three convicted Accra-based Montie panellists in order to please his party people on the one hand, and allowing the convicts  to serve their four-month jail term to avoid setting a wrong precedence for the country.

Article 72 of the 1992 Constitution states in part that:

1) The President may, acting in consultation with the Council of State-

(a) grant to a person convicted of an offence a pardon either free or subject to lawful conditions; or

(b) grant to a person a respite, either indefinite or for a specified period, from the execution of punishment imposed on him for an offence; or

(c) substitute a less severe form of punishment for a punishment imposed on a person for an offence; or (d) remit the whole or part of a punishment imposed on a person or of a penalty or forfeiture otherwise due to Government on account on any offence.

Last Wednesday, Salifu Maase, popularly known as Mugabe, former host of the late afternoon political programme on Montie FM, Pampaso, and his two panellists, Alistair Nelson and Godwin AkoGunn were cut to size by a five-member Supreme Court panel, headed by Justice Sophia Akufo.

This was after the trio were found guilty of contempt for threatening to kill judges if they failed to dissociate themselves from the Electoral Commission vs Abu Ramadan & Evans Nimako case,

Just after they were handed their sentences, in addition to a fine of GHC10,000 each, legal luminaries and supporters of the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC), started reading their own meanings into the judgment.

Disappointed foot soldiers of the 'umbrella party' expressed disappointment over the failure of their party to take advantage of its incumbency to set free their communicators, who had threatened the lives of judges of the superior courts.

According to some of them, the New Patriotic Party (NPP), while in power, had control over the judiciary and was able to convict top members of the NDC, including Mr Tsatsu Tsikata, when the erstwhile Rawlings-led administration left office.

But for the NDC to allow their members to be imprisoned, even though the party was in office, meant that the party could not guarantee their protection and safety, in the course pouring out their hearts to campaign for the party.

And following the relaxed attitude of the leadership of the NDC towards the sentencing of the ‘Montie 3’, as has now occupied the lips of Ghanaians, scores of angry supporters, yesterday besieged the headquarters of the party in Accra, to demand the release of the convicts.

While swearing, chanting and cursing, the supporters beseeched the president to invoke his powers of clemency under Article 72 to set free Mugabe, Alistair Nelson and Godwin Ako-Gunn.

However, some lawyers feel any interference by the President would be an attack on the independence of the judiciary.

For instance, a Law Lecturer at the Central University College, Yaw Oppong and Counsel at Bentsi-Enchill Letsa &Ankomah, Korieh Duodu, unanimously agreed on PM Express, on Joy News on Wednesday that, the intervention of the President would not be the right thing to do.

Mr Duodu was of the belief that pardoning the convicted NDC communicators would be a scandalous thing to do and could have the issue escalate if the President took such a step, saying it “simply won't be acceptable for the President to do that…

The Supreme Court, acting in its independent capacity, has made this ruling and expects the ruling to be carried out,” he stressed. For Mr Oppong, the President would have to rise above the temptation to please the NDC supporters by taking any counter action.

“It won't be legally appropriate, that doesn't mean it will be against the law, but in the general frame of things it will never be appropriate – especially in an election year,” he said.

“It may be politically disastrous. There are people who have vowed to vote this way or that way. But the few who determine who should be President of Ghana — the so called floating voters, things like these can easily sway them. But it should not just be based on voting. It should be based on sound principles,” he added.

But lawyers for the convicts would want the intervention of the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, through the exercise of the prerogative of mercy.

In a statement, Nana Ato Dadzie and Mr George Loh said although they admitted that comments made by their clients were 'unacceptable', they considered the sentence harsh and excessive.

They argued that: “We do admit some of the statements uttered by some of our clients are unacceptable. We nevertheless consider custodial sentence of four months imposed by the Supreme Court as being excessive and harsh.

“We also do not believe that citizens of Ghana ought to be committed to prison for infractions on free expression especially in light of the repeal of the criminal libel law. Our clients have directed us in circumstances to petition His Excellency the President of the Republic to exercise his powers of prerogative of mercy under Article 72 of the Constitution of Ghana,” their statement said.

Some weeks ago, Alistar Nelson and his co-panellist, Godwin Ako Gunn threw caution to the wind and made frightening statements against members of the bench. They made statements like:

“Today you want to sit there and use your left hands to point at things to destroy this nation, we know your homes. Mugabe, the High Court judges, I can stand at one junction and tell you where all of them live, or most of the influential ones live.”

Following the threat, the Supreme Court cited them for contempt. The three, supposedly brave men, expressed remorse and pleaded with the court to tamper justice with mercy.

The court adjourned the case to July 27, after the contemnors had been found guilty of “scandalizing the court, defying and lowering the authority of the court and bringing the authority of the court into disrepute.”

Mugabe, who many thought was ready for prison sentence, after claiming he was no better than the likes of Tsatsu Tsikata, who had been there before, when he was summoned, said he regretted his comments and consequently rendered an apology to the judges.

He explained that his producer on the day of the programme was ill, which meant that there was no one in the studio of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) platform, to put him on his toes.

Despite all the pleas from counsel of the contemnors to prevent the tape from being played, due to its shameful and embarrassing contents, it was done in the interest of justice, as posited by the presiding judge.