Let me ask this writer should Ghana live without the rule of law. Or nobody must be sentenced to prison. Or this guy empty of conscience is saying those that speak on the radio can threaten to kill but no law should touch the ... read full comment
Let me ask this writer should Ghana live without the rule of law. Or nobody must be sentenced to prison. Or this guy empty of conscience is saying those that speak on the radio can threaten to kill but no law should touch them, but those that will threaten to kill outside the radio must be jailed or nobody should be punished in Ghana when their intention to kill is known. How is this nation wrecker
King Bright 7 years ago
I blame myself for getting through all that crap, I really should have known better. I promise never to read anything from any lunatic again, never, so help me God.
I blame myself for getting through all that crap, I really should have known better. I promise never to read anything from any lunatic again, never, so help me God.
SUFFERETH NO FOOLS 7 years ago
The opinion reads more into the intentions of the framers of the Constitution and at some point he replaces the original intention with his. If the framers had been that detailed in their thinking we would not have had a cons ... read full comment
The opinion reads more into the intentions of the framers of the Constitution and at some point he replaces the original intention with his. If the framers had been that detailed in their thinking we would not have had a constitution. It could never have been part of the purpose of the framers of the constitution not to have permitted the control of the media by the COURT.
Kwadwo 7 years ago
Is this academic lawyer suggesting that party hacks should be allowed to set the country fire in the name of free speech? Just threaten acts of terrorism against the US and see if you can rely on free speech to. exculpate you ... read full comment
Is this academic lawyer suggesting that party hacks should be allowed to set the country fire in the name of free speech? Just threaten acts of terrorism against the US and see if you can rely on free speech to. exculpate yourself. If the Rwandan's had punished those who were spewing hate speech on the airwaves, thousands of innocent lives would have been saved. You should descend from the ivory towers and come to the trenches where real law is practiced.
King Kabon 7 years ago
Kwaku Asare, I know you to be a lifetime sympathizer of NPP. I wonder why you choose to write this article. What do you think your NPP friends will think of you. You already know the political position they have taken on this ... read full comment
Kwaku Asare, I know you to be a lifetime sympathizer of NPP. I wonder why you choose to write this article. What do you think your NPP friends will think of you. You already know the political position they have taken on this matter. Brace yourself for onslaught.
Willie 7 years ago
This time Asare is talking strictly about the constitution and its interpretation by our highest court. That he is a lifelong NPP supporter making arguments based on PRINCIPLES should rather endear him to you. He is bold! He ... read full comment
This time Asare is talking strictly about the constitution and its interpretation by our highest court. That he is a lifelong NPP supporter making arguments based on PRINCIPLES should rather endear him to you. He is bold! He must be commended.
kweku trouble 7 years ago
You are right but he will be brutally condemned and insulted by his NPP folks because they don't tolerate any objective views. That's the point King Kabon is making.
You are right but he will be brutally condemned and insulted by his NPP folks because they don't tolerate any objective views. That's the point King Kabon is making.
Willie 7 years ago
As for me, I find this long piece very well argued and well written. Asare carefully examines the LEGAL ISSUES touching the sentimental arguments only briefly.
The Justices of the SC come off as unlearned, pompous and vin ... read full comment
As for me, I find this long piece very well argued and well written. Asare carefully examines the LEGAL ISSUES touching the sentimental arguments only briefly.
The Justices of the SC come off as unlearned, pompous and vindictive. The worst of these is their inability to correctly interpret the constitution of the land. This is serious since the court is supposed to be made up of some of our best legal minds.
Everybody agrees that the Montie 3 have done wrong. That is not at issue here. What is at issue is if the SC, in its actions, has done justice to the law that they have sworn to uphold. The answer is no! They have interpreted the constitution in a wrong way. I think that is an even more serious disservice to the body polity than the Montie 3's unguarded and thoughtless utterances. The SC's ruling was arrived at after careful thought (unlike the Montie 3's expensive "joke"). And that careful thought still led to a thoughtless ruling.
I find Asare's take on the pardon prerogative also convincing. However, I think the President should not exercise that prerogative in this instance. It will appear politically biased since the offenders are aligned to his party. Secondly, the punishments, even if harsh, are not impossible to be borne by the offenders. It's not as if it's a death sentence or prison time in the Gulag or Siberia.
Let them serve their sentences, and let the judgement forever be a blot in the careers of the justices - one which subsequent justices will learn from by avoiding.
Prof. Issifu, USA 7 years ago
For once this accounting professor who has studied law as an afterthought doesn't get it! Freedom of the press goes with a responsibility. Even in the US where the first amendment to the constitution guarantees free speech, t ... read full comment
For once this accounting professor who has studied law as an afterthought doesn't get it! Freedom of the press goes with a responsibility. Even in the US where the first amendment to the constitution guarantees free speech, there are inherent limits. Hateful and inciteful speech are punishable in the US. What the MONTIE 3 said on radio wouldn't be acceptable in the US nor any civilized society. I know Prof. Asare since our days at St. Augustine's College, Cape Coast in the late 1970s and I'm therefore hesitant to condemn his writing in public but I'm sad he doesn't get this issue right! Or he's just trying to be relevant in this debate? I'm sad for my old school mate AZAAR!
kweku trouble 7 years ago
"For once this accounting professor who has studied law as an afterthought. . .". So what?
"For once this accounting professor who has studied law as an afterthought. . .". So what?
Safohene 7 years ago
Prof. 3 sitting Judges were brutally murdered, up to this time no one knows why. Today also sitting Judges are being threatening. Prof. in simple words without too much law English what do we do.
Prof. 3 sitting Judges were brutally murdered, up to this time no one knows why. Today also sitting Judges are being threatening. Prof. in simple words without too much law English what do we do.
Kofi Ata, Cambridge, UK 7 years ago
Prof Issifu, as APSU, you must know that Azar will not be offended if you were honest with your views instead of holding back because of your connection as APSU. As my classmate and friend from "O" to "A" I do not shy away fr ... read full comment
Prof Issifu, as APSU, you must know that Azar will not be offended if you were honest with your views instead of holding back because of your connection as APSU. As my classmate and friend from "O" to "A" I do not shy away from disagreeing with Azar on Ghanaweb just because we were classmates. It's the substance of your argument that Azar will appreciate rather than anything else.
He is made very important legal arguments and that is what you have to argue on and not emotions on your connections with him.
By the way, what years were you at Augusco and which house were you. I am from the 1977 Year Group was in St John's House. Kind regards, APSU
Koobenja 7 years ago
Kofi, this is from his other Vandal-mate, Prof. K. Prempeh:
"There is probably a fourth group, populated, as far as I know, by only one person whose position in this palaver defies easy classification. That one-man group ... read full comment
Kofi, this is from his other Vandal-mate, Prof. K. Prempeh:
"There is probably a fourth group, populated, as far as I know, by only one person whose position in this palaver defies easy classification. That one-man group is my good friend, classmate and fellow Vandal Professor Kwaku Azar.
Although an ally of the Group 1 partisans in this debate, he does not share their longstanding illiberalism in matters of free speech. To the contrary, he has been a consistent defender of free speech and an opponent of the "crack the whip" type of criminal contempt practised by our courts.
He also happens to be the most vocal champion of the use of Article 72 in this case, defending the pardon power as necessary in this case to undo the criminal contempt jailing of the Muntie 3, an act he deems to be judicial tyranny. His present cooptation by Group 1 partisans is primarily for his Article 72 stance and is largely opportunistic.
The issue, then, is not about free speech. It is not even about the propriety or constitutionality of summary criminal contempt jurisprudence.
It is about rival views of presidential and judicial power. Excepting Azar's idiosyncratic category, the issue boils down primarily to a dispute between those who believe in the political (even partisan) control of judicial power, many of whom have found a convenient and useful ally momentarily in the pardon power of the President, and those who reject a presidential pardon in this instance as an improper use of presidential power designed to diminish and undermine the judiciary for partisan purposes."
ATTA 7 years ago
Much ado about nothing, this waqste of public space.
How can anyone ",maintain public order" without giving the courts the power to protect themselves against being scandalised and intimidated from enforcing the laws of t ... read full comment
Much ado about nothing, this waqste of public space.
How can anyone ",maintain public order" without giving the courts the power to protect themselves against being scandalised and intimidated from enforcing the laws of the land?
Bernard 7 years ago
Maca, also known as Lepidium Meyenii, is an annual plant that is cultivated in the Peruvian central highlands. The edible root, which resembles a radish, is a staple food for the local population.
Maca has been highly reve ... read full comment
Maca, also known as Lepidium Meyenii, is an annual plant that is cultivated in the Peruvian central highlands. The edible root, which resembles a radish, is a staple food for the local population.
Maca has been highly revered for over 2,000 years in Peru. According to legend, the Incan warriors ate Maca for strength and endurance before going to battle. The Spanish Conquistadors called it the “sex herb of the Incas.” Today it is known as “Peruvian Ginseng”. Modern studies suggest that Maca may promote libido, sexual potency and energy.
Women in South America have also used Maca for thousands of years to help maintain their stamina and handle stress. Peruvian women begin using Maca at age 3, and remain strong, fertile and productive, well into their later life. Maca may increase a woman’s libido, and should be taken daily for best results.
Forever Multi-Maca® combines legendary Peruvian Maca with other powerful herbs and select ingredients, to create one of the finest supplements of its kind!
Known as the sex herb of the Incas
1. Forever Multi-Maca have a special property which enhances
energy and stamina.
2.It also enhances and increases sexual desires.0572174551
3. It has a powerful property that boosts the potency of male libido,its natural property helps to creat an aphrodisiac-like response in men who have suffered from potency,low sex-drive and fertility problems.
4. Also improves the quality and quantity of sperms in men who have lower than the normal sperm counts,helping to increase the level of fertility.
5. Strengthen endurance and energy level.
6. Multi-Maca is known as a powerful male erectile solution.
7.It gives you a long lasting power within the bedroom eliminating fatigue.0572174551
Kwabena ohemeng,london 7 years ago
If the Supreme Court chooses to arrest,prosecute and jail criminals which court must criminals appeal to if they feel justice has not been done to them by the Supreme Court?In the Montie3 case it means the Supreme Court has g ... read full comment
If the Supreme Court chooses to arrest,prosecute and jail criminals which court must criminals appeal to if they feel justice has not been done to them by the Supreme Court?In the Montie3 case it means the Supreme Court has guillotined any appeal process for them.This clearly undermines justice for the Montie3 and it is a dangerous precedence the Supreme Court has set.No matter how despicable the behavior of the Montie3 the Supreme Court erred by sitting on the case.It deprived the Montiu3 the right to appeal against their sentence.The Supreme Court should have referred the case to a lower court.The accused's right to justice must always be upheld and protected.
Abongos 7 years ago
Booklong incompetence!
A simple reference check on Contempt of Court convictions will enlighten you that some cases are NOT subject to appeal if it is the Judge's DISCRETION that sentence will not be over 6-months!
Why ... read full comment
Booklong incompetence!
A simple reference check on Contempt of Court convictions will enlighten you that some cases are NOT subject to appeal if it is the Judge's DISCRETION that sentence will not be over 6-months!
Why do you think only Parliament and the Courts have the exclusive power of contempt citations?
Kwame Nim 7 years ago
The supreme court didn't arrest anybody. It is fear that caused the Montie 3 to be jailed. They invited them to justify why they shouldn't be jailed. They didn't prosecute them
Those who say they acted as prosecuters were wr ... read full comment
The supreme court didn't arrest anybody. It is fear that caused the Montie 3 to be jailed. They invited them to justify why they shouldn't be jailed. They didn't prosecute them
Those who say they acted as prosecuters were wrong. The people came not to argue their case but to accept guilt. Who says supreme court doesn't try criminal cases. They represent the last position in criMina trials. Kwaku you are wrong hence your persistent hitting to justify your earlier rushed position
KONKOTI 7 years ago
If to 'demonstrate' its authority the court had to resort to penalising people for supposedly defying its order that it had not yet issued, then you know that the court either has 'missed road' or is suffering from a legitima ... read full comment
If to 'demonstrate' its authority the court had to resort to penalising people for supposedly defying its order that it had not yet issued, then you know that the court either has 'missed road' or is suffering from a legitimacy ailment -- or both! Either way, it is a malady, which is the exact reflection of the state of affairs in Ghana today -- SICK!
HONESTY 7 years ago
Your write up is one of the best I have read on this issue. It also shows you are very consistent is your knowledge and interpretation of the law. It is consistent with your opinions on the contempt cases during the bogus Aku ... read full comment
Your write up is one of the best I have read on this issue. It also shows you are very consistent is your knowledge and interpretation of the law. It is consistent with your opinions on the contempt cases during the bogus Akufo Addo election challenge enterprise. Prof. ignore the "political" lawyers who are criticizing you. They are secretly learning from you, unless they are no wise.
DR. SAS, ATTORNEY AT LAW 7 years ago
I agree with you in many respects Prof.
I would even go as far as to say that I don't see any criminal elements in the threats these three goons made on air.
Criminal threat ought to be evaluated in the context of the i ... read full comment
I agree with you in many respects Prof.
I would even go as far as to say that I don't see any criminal elements in the threats these three goons made on air.
Criminal threat ought to be evaluated in the context of the individual's intent ( and sometimes capacity) to carry the threat out.
As repugnant as the threats made by the Montie 3 was, they neither had the intent nor the means to carry them out. In this instance, the Attorney General was right in not going forward with any prosecution.
Having said this, I commend your analyses of the contempt laws as they stand in the country, and how the Supreme Court acted ultra vires as to them. By their action, they have dangerously circumscribed free speech in the public square in ways that defy our democratic principles.
Those who disagree with you assert a certain emotional view of the content of the speech itself without bringing forward any analyses of law and fact to the table.
Kofi Ata, Cambridge, UK 7 years ago
Azar, you have beaten me to it and well done. I planned to analyse the constitutionality or otherwise of the SC Montie ruling over the weekend but laziness took the better part of me. My intention is to consider Articles 14(1 ... read full comment
Azar, you have beaten me to it and well done. I planned to analyse the constitutionality or otherwise of the SC Montie ruling over the weekend but laziness took the better part of me. My intention is to consider Articles 14(1) and 19(1)(11) vis-à-vis Articles 126(2) and 19(12). My conclusion is that the ruling is unconstitutional and I will rely on the earlier SC majority decision in the case of Prof Stephen Kwaku Asare v The Attorney General (Writ No: JI/15/2015) by quoting one of the reasons given by Chief Justice in her written decision.
This is another brilliant contribution to development of constitutional law in Ghana and I agree with Dr SAS that those who disagree with you should look beyond what the Montie ganga did or did not do and their emotions. Instead, they should objectively consider the legal basis of your conclusions, the dangers of treating ex facie curiae contempt as if its in facie curiae contempt by the highest court of the land, the dangers of such precedents and the risk of abuse by especially but not exclusively High Court judges in ex facie curiae contempt in the near future. Let's continue the debate.
Sylvester Mensah. 7 years ago
Academically fantastic. But consider societal norms and values. Too much constitutionalism may lead to breakage in the respect for authority which is a cardinal societal value.
Academically fantastic. But consider societal norms and values. Too much constitutionalism may lead to breakage in the respect for authority which is a cardinal societal value.
Obuama 7 years ago
Politics has blinded a lot of people from appreciating honest and objective analysis of the issue on hand. They appear happy to applaud judiciary lawlessness and tyranny. Today it is the Montie 3, but tomorrow it could be any ... read full comment
Politics has blinded a lot of people from appreciating honest and objective analysis of the issue on hand. They appear happy to applaud judiciary lawlessness and tyranny. Today it is the Montie 3, but tomorrow it could be anyone ofm us, including those making hateful and infantile comments on this platform. The law of karma is always there to catch up with us once our actions are tainted with hatred and bias. tomorrow a judge will sentence someone to death or life for a very trivial offence and we will have no cause to challenge it because we would have collectively encouraged and emboldened them to act with impunity. Our judges are not God, and neither are they beyond reproach. In fact, Anas has proved that most of them are very corrupt, so what guarantee can we put on their fairness? There writer has pointed out the arbitrariness and lack of fairness in the Montie 3 case, yet we have people who, out of sheer evil, wickedness and vengeance have thrown human feelings and devine mercy out of their vocabulary to the extent that they are even using threats, Communist Inferior Tactics and weird interpretation of the constitution to prevent the president from exercising his prerogative of mercy. These people will certainly not deserve mercy and forgiveness from God for the sins they commit. As for Sophia Akuffo and the panel of judges, it is clear that they were out there for vengeance and not to administer justice. God is certainly watching us.
Jojo Hammond, New Jersey 7 years ago
Prof, I can't help but to salute you for the depth of your analyses. In this era of hyper-partisanship which has all but made any meaningful discussions impossible, you have provided a path for us to follow.
It is no secr ... read full comment
Prof, I can't help but to salute you for the depth of your analyses. In this era of hyper-partisanship which has all but made any meaningful discussions impossible, you have provided a path for us to follow.
It is no secret that your sympathies lie with the NPP, but you have done what academics do; staking a position, and using brilliant arguments to defend them. I applaud your consistency !!!
I have not agreed with you sometimes, but I have always respected the force and sheer brilliance of your arguments, this is what true intellectuals do.
APSU should be proud of you !!!!
Kwabena Yeboah 7 years ago
Kwaku Assare wrote:
"The only limitation imposed on the “media protection” clause is that it is, “subject to laws that are reasonably required in the interest of national security, public order, public morality and f ... read full comment
Kwaku Assare wrote:
"The only limitation imposed on the “media protection” clause is that it is, “subject to laws that are reasonably required in the interest of national security, public order, public morality and for the purpose of protecting the reputations, rights and freedoms of other persons.”
WHEW!!! So Kwaku Asare wants to convince me that the Montie 3 threats of killing and raping the Justices on radio, do not fall under the purview of the tenet of the Constitution? Doesn't Montie 3 threats to our democratic institution constitute a threat to national security and public order?
How can Kwaku Asare posit that the Montie 3 were justifiably within the confine of their Constitutional protection in public morality and for the purpose of protecting the reputation, rights and freedoms of other persons, when they publicly threaten the lives of the Justices who were at the time of the threats performing their constitutional duties to the nation.
Please come again, because I am hugely disappointed with your constant vilification of the Supreme Court of Ghana. We must be careful not to provide the fodder for the largely illiterate Ghanaian society to attack and destabilize our democratic institutions. And this is precisely what my learned friend Kwaku Asare is doing. I am disappointed.
luther king 7 years ago
Kwabene Yeboah, u did not read the article or u clearly misunderstood the content. The prof clearly stated that he was appalled by the what the muntie 3 said. But the constitution provides for free trial and presumption of in ... read full comment
Kwabene Yeboah, u did not read the article or u clearly misunderstood the content. The prof clearly stated that he was appalled by the what the muntie 3 said. But the constitution provides for free trial and presumption of innocence untill proven guilty. In this case the trio were guilty and had to prove their innocence in court. He added that the issue abt the threat shd have been taken over by the AG where the accused would've been taken thru the right court proceedings . U cant claim to be upholding the constitution and at the same time violating it.
Kwabena Yeboah 7 years ago
Mr. King, if you had read Kwaku Asare's article carefully, you would have noticed the contradictions in his submission relating to protection the 1992 Constitution grants to the media.
He writes, and I quote: "Because the ... read full comment
Mr. King, if you had read Kwaku Asare's article carefully, you would have noticed the contradictions in his submission relating to protection the 1992 Constitution grants to the media.
He writes, and I quote: "Because the Court used its contempt sword to traverse these otherwise impenetrable constitutional shield..." of the media (the emphasis is mine). Kwaku Asare is referring to three basic protections the 1992 Constitution accords the media: 1) the punishment of media pesonnel for their editorial opinion; 2) views and the content of their publications; 3) the use of summary proceedings to deprive citizens of their liberty.
What Kwaku Asare is suggesting here is that, the media protection in the 1992 Constitution is ABSOLUTE, no ifs or but. But is it?
Then Kwake Asare turns around and states this, and I quote:"The only limitation imposed on the “media protection” clause is that it is, “subject to laws that are reasonably required in the interest of national security, public order, public morality and for the purpose of protecting the reputations, rights and freedoms of other persons.”
So there is limitation imposed on the media by the Constitution afterall. Do you see the contradiction, my friend? In one breath, Kwaku Asare is telling the reading public that the 1992 Constitution affords the media "impenetrable shield" of protection as to what it writes or says. And in another breath, he states there are limitations to the conduct of the media in the Constitution. Forget what he said about the action or inaction of AG, and focus on the substantive issue projected in his article.
Listen, I respect Kwaku Asare because he is one of the finest minds on Ghanaweb. However, I wish he would stop throwing curved balls at the Supreme Court of Ghana. He has a penchant for vilifying the top Court in the land. What he is doing is dangerous to our democratic institutions and must stop.
kwadwo. 7 years ago
Sometimes academics fail to realize the security environment under which these justices are operating. Thugs are threatening to rape and kill judges and this academic is gone bonkers on the Court sentencing them to 4 month ... read full comment
Sometimes academics fail to realize the security environment under which these justices are operating. Thugs are threatening to rape and kill judges and this academic is gone bonkers on the Court sentencing them to 4 months in prison for their conduct. Freedom of speech is never absolute and I believe those who were calling for the killing of people in Rwanda were punished for inciting the killings. Do we have to wait for rape or murder of a judge for the Courts to act? We know very well the atoorney general looking the other way when this happened. I am glad these foul mouthed tugs are in the cooler to remind others that this will never be tolerated.. They did this because of a mistaken belief that they will get away with it. If the Professor is so incensed,he should seek judicial review and stop these articles.Freedom of speech is alive in Ghana.
tester 7 years ago
correct
correct
Willie 7 years ago
Kwadwo and Yeboah, yours is the argument some others are describing as emotional. You are talking of what you think should be right to promote a certain morality in society.
But Asare is talking purely of what written law ... read full comment
Kwadwo and Yeboah, yours is the argument some others are describing as emotional. You are talking of what you think should be right to promote a certain morality in society.
But Asare is talking purely of what written laws say and if such have been correctly interpreted. He has convincingly shown that they have not.
Even good intentions must be based on the correct interpretation of the law, especially by the highest court of the land.
Bruz 7 years ago
So you think a pedantic discourse by one
so-called Law Professor, is sufficient enough to negate all the trial experience of sitting Justices?
How many court cases has this professor been
litigating in a real court-roo ... read full comment
So you think a pedantic discourse by one
so-called Law Professor, is sufficient enough to negate all the trial experience of sitting Justices?
How many court cases has this professor been
litigating in a real court-room, other than all those frivolous lawsuits/petitions are done for him by lawyers he hired as an absentee client?
Willie 7 years ago
No, I am saying you must argue from the particular legal points he makes, not from the general ones of if he is pedantic or not or of how many cases he has won...
If you think his interpretation of the specific sections of ... read full comment
No, I am saying you must argue from the particular legal points he makes, not from the general ones of if he is pedantic or not or of how many cases he has won...
If you think his interpretation of the specific sections of the Constitution he cites is wrong and how the justices interpreted the same clauses is right, then you must say so and show us how one interpretation is right and the other wrong. You must make legal arguments and leave out the extraneous matter...
Bruz 7 years ago
Willie, the same constitution and its framers that Asare laboriously quotes, also gave the ultimate interpretation of our statutes to the SC!
Legal gunslingers, professors, hijackers can vent till the sea doesn't have wave ... read full comment
Willie, the same constitution and its framers that Asare laboriously quotes, also gave the ultimate interpretation of our statutes to the SC!
Legal gunslingers, professors, hijackers can vent till the sea doesn't have waves anymore!
Willie 7 years ago
Yes, you're right that the SC is the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution. But that doesn't mean any interpretation they give, even if binding, will be correct legally. That is why even the justices themselves can differ ... read full comment
Yes, you're right that the SC is the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution. But that doesn't mean any interpretation they give, even if binding, will be correct legally. That is why even the justices themselves can differ in their rulings. In such a situation, the legal merits of a ruling can be discussed and wrong interpretations pointed out.
Bruz 7 years ago
Spot on, Sir!
Have a pleasant day!
Spot on, Sir!
Have a pleasant day!
Kwabena Yeboah 7 years ago
No, no, no, Willie! Kwadwo and I are not lawyers by any stretch of the imagination.
What we are doing is using Kwaku Asare's own legal arguments to confound him.
No, no, no, Willie! Kwadwo and I are not lawyers by any stretch of the imagination.
What we are doing is using Kwaku Asare's own legal arguments to confound him.
SAMUEL AGBEVI 7 years ago
WHEN STUPID PEOPLE LIKE YOU TAKE MONEY YOU END UP WRITING ANY RUBBISH TO WASTE OUR TIME. THEY HAVE TO ROT IN PRISON SIMPLE. IF YOU WANT TO KILL SOMEONE, THEN YOU MUST DIE FIRST.
WHEN STUPID PEOPLE LIKE YOU TAKE MONEY YOU END UP WRITING ANY RUBBISH TO WASTE OUR TIME. THEY HAVE TO ROT IN PRISON SIMPLE. IF YOU WANT TO KILL SOMEONE, THEN YOU MUST DIE FIRST.
Let me ask this writer should Ghana live without the rule of law. Or nobody must be sentenced to prison. Or this guy empty of conscience is saying those that speak on the radio can threaten to kill but no law should touch the ...
read full comment
I blame myself for getting through all that crap, I really should have known better. I promise never to read anything from any lunatic again, never, so help me God.
The opinion reads more into the intentions of the framers of the Constitution and at some point he replaces the original intention with his. If the framers had been that detailed in their thinking we would not have had a cons ...
read full comment
Is this academic lawyer suggesting that party hacks should be allowed to set the country fire in the name of free speech? Just threaten acts of terrorism against the US and see if you can rely on free speech to. exculpate you ...
read full comment
Kwaku Asare, I know you to be a lifetime sympathizer of NPP. I wonder why you choose to write this article. What do you think your NPP friends will think of you. You already know the political position they have taken on this ...
read full comment
This time Asare is talking strictly about the constitution and its interpretation by our highest court. That he is a lifelong NPP supporter making arguments based on PRINCIPLES should rather endear him to you. He is bold! He ...
read full comment
You are right but he will be brutally condemned and insulted by his NPP folks because they don't tolerate any objective views. That's the point King Kabon is making.
As for me, I find this long piece very well argued and well written. Asare carefully examines the LEGAL ISSUES touching the sentimental arguments only briefly.
The Justices of the SC come off as unlearned, pompous and vin ...
read full comment
For once this accounting professor who has studied law as an afterthought doesn't get it! Freedom of the press goes with a responsibility. Even in the US where the first amendment to the constitution guarantees free speech, t ...
read full comment
"For once this accounting professor who has studied law as an afterthought. . .". So what?
Prof. 3 sitting Judges were brutally murdered, up to this time no one knows why. Today also sitting Judges are being threatening. Prof. in simple words without too much law English what do we do.
Prof Issifu, as APSU, you must know that Azar will not be offended if you were honest with your views instead of holding back because of your connection as APSU. As my classmate and friend from "O" to "A" I do not shy away fr ...
read full comment
Kofi, this is from his other Vandal-mate, Prof. K. Prempeh:
"There is probably a fourth group, populated, as far as I know, by only one person whose position in this palaver defies easy classification. That one-man group ...
read full comment
Much ado about nothing, this waqste of public space.
How can anyone ",maintain public order" without giving the courts the power to protect themselves against being scandalised and intimidated from enforcing the laws of t ...
read full comment
Maca, also known as Lepidium Meyenii, is an annual plant that is cultivated in the Peruvian central highlands. The edible root, which resembles a radish, is a staple food for the local population.
Maca has been highly reve ...
read full comment
If the Supreme Court chooses to arrest,prosecute and jail criminals which court must criminals appeal to if they feel justice has not been done to them by the Supreme Court?In the Montie3 case it means the Supreme Court has g ...
read full comment
Booklong incompetence!
A simple reference check on Contempt of Court convictions will enlighten you that some cases are NOT subject to appeal if it is the Judge's DISCRETION that sentence will not be over 6-months!
Why ...
read full comment
The supreme court didn't arrest anybody. It is fear that caused the Montie 3 to be jailed. They invited them to justify why they shouldn't be jailed. They didn't prosecute them
Those who say they acted as prosecuters were wr ...
read full comment
If to 'demonstrate' its authority the court had to resort to penalising people for supposedly defying its order that it had not yet issued, then you know that the court either has 'missed road' or is suffering from a legitima ...
read full comment
Your write up is one of the best I have read on this issue. It also shows you are very consistent is your knowledge and interpretation of the law. It is consistent with your opinions on the contempt cases during the bogus Aku ...
read full comment
I agree with you in many respects Prof.
I would even go as far as to say that I don't see any criminal elements in the threats these three goons made on air.
Criminal threat ought to be evaluated in the context of the i ...
read full comment
Azar, you have beaten me to it and well done. I planned to analyse the constitutionality or otherwise of the SC Montie ruling over the weekend but laziness took the better part of me. My intention is to consider Articles 14(1 ...
read full comment
Academically fantastic. But consider societal norms and values. Too much constitutionalism may lead to breakage in the respect for authority which is a cardinal societal value.
Politics has blinded a lot of people from appreciating honest and objective analysis of the issue on hand. They appear happy to applaud judiciary lawlessness and tyranny. Today it is the Montie 3, but tomorrow it could be any ...
read full comment
Prof, I can't help but to salute you for the depth of your analyses. In this era of hyper-partisanship which has all but made any meaningful discussions impossible, you have provided a path for us to follow.
It is no secr ...
read full comment
Kwaku Assare wrote:
"The only limitation imposed on the “media protection” clause is that it is, “subject to laws that are reasonably required in the interest of national security, public order, public morality and f ...
read full comment
Kwabene Yeboah, u did not read the article or u clearly misunderstood the content. The prof clearly stated that he was appalled by the what the muntie 3 said. But the constitution provides for free trial and presumption of in ...
read full comment
Mr. King, if you had read Kwaku Asare's article carefully, you would have noticed the contradictions in his submission relating to protection the 1992 Constitution grants to the media.
He writes, and I quote: "Because the ...
read full comment
Sometimes academics fail to realize the security environment under which these justices are operating. Thugs are threatening to rape and kill judges and this academic is gone bonkers on the Court sentencing them to 4 month ...
read full comment
correct
Kwadwo and Yeboah, yours is the argument some others are describing as emotional. You are talking of what you think should be right to promote a certain morality in society.
But Asare is talking purely of what written law ...
read full comment
So you think a pedantic discourse by one
so-called Law Professor, is sufficient enough to negate all the trial experience of sitting Justices?
How many court cases has this professor been
litigating in a real court-roo ...
read full comment
No, I am saying you must argue from the particular legal points he makes, not from the general ones of if he is pedantic or not or of how many cases he has won...
If you think his interpretation of the specific sections of ...
read full comment
Willie, the same constitution and its framers that Asare laboriously quotes, also gave the ultimate interpretation of our statutes to the SC!
Legal gunslingers, professors, hijackers can vent till the sea doesn't have wave ...
read full comment
Yes, you're right that the SC is the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution. But that doesn't mean any interpretation they give, even if binding, will be correct legally. That is why even the justices themselves can differ ...
read full comment
Spot on, Sir!
Have a pleasant day!
No, no, no, Willie! Kwadwo and I are not lawyers by any stretch of the imagination.
What we are doing is using Kwaku Asare's own legal arguments to confound him.
WHEN STUPID PEOPLE LIKE YOU TAKE MONEY YOU END UP WRITING ANY RUBBISH TO WASTE OUR TIME. THEY HAVE TO ROT IN PRISON SIMPLE. IF YOU WANT TO KILL SOMEONE, THEN YOU MUST DIE FIRST.