Justice Charles Quist on Thursday granted a GH¢ 200,000 bail to beleaguered Assin North MP on health grounds after he was detained in the cells of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) based on ‘treasonable’ remarks he made on Oman FM last week.

Ken Agyapong, who has been charged with treason felony and acts of terrorism, signed a bond to be of good behaviour until the final determination of the case.

Justice Charles Quist also advised the prosecution to revise its charges of terrorism against Mr. Agyapong.

The bail granted Kennedy Agyapong has raised a lot of eyebrows and many are questioning the decision of the judge.

According to David Annan, a member of the NDC legal team, the trial Judge erred in granting bail to Ken Agyapong. He argued that the judge has no legal basis to grant bail and as such the NDC has lost confidence in that judge.

“We in the [NDC] legal team have lost confidence in that judge because of the unnecessary statement he [Justice Charles Quist] made. I don’t know why you want to make a particular High Court judge's decision seem to be the decision from Jesus Christ,” he stated.

A Human Rights Court earlier in the day granted Kennedy Agyapong bail in the sum of GH¢200,000 with two sureties on health grounds following a habeas corpus writ filed by his lawyers after he had been charged on three counts of treason, treason felony and attempted genocide.

Justice Essel Mensah said he granted the bail because he used his discretion of court rules and the provision of a medical report on the health condition of the MP, who is said to be diabetic.

These developments are indeed worrying for our democracy.

According to the forth republican constitution, the president who is also the Commander-In-chief of the Ghana Armed Forces is the only person capable of declaring war and for an individual to publicly declare war on one ethnic group is obviously usurping the powers of the president.

The court act and rules have interpretation to such an offence and we on *The True* *Statesman* are not enthused about the current development.

We agree with the position being espoused by lawyer David Annan that the judge erred in law for allowing the accused person to walk away from such a non-baliable offence.

The genocidal statements and the subsequent promotion of hate for Gas and Ewes by Kennedy Agyapong is not only indefensible but criminal, and the court cannot be seen to be promoting such unguarded statements.

Such unguarded utterances have caused genocide in Rwanda where over 800,000 people mainly from the Tutsi minority were cold bloodedly murdered.

It appears the likes of Kenedy Agyapong have not learnt any lesson from the Rwandan genocide. As a country, we do not appear to have the resources and the expertise to defuse the prospect of our nation becoming another Rwanda.

The judiciary must therefore dispense justice to all irrespective who is involved.

A token justice that is delivered with the view to moderate societal revulsion against a serious criminal action is no justice at all. As a nation, we cannot allow this miscarriage of justice to become part of our nation’s jurisprudential philosophy. As history has it, the subversion of the law to appease certain backdoor-politicians is not healthy for our nation’s democratic credentials and international image.

Nobody is a law unto himself and the judiciary must act as in a way that will not raise eyebrows.

The True Statesman

info@thetruestatesman.org