The Court of Appeal has ordered ace Investigative Journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas to remove his mask before testifying as a witness in the case in which former GFA President, Kwasi Nyantakyi, and one other are facing criminal charges.
The unanimous decision of the Court of Appeal thus reverses an earlier ruling by the trial High Court on May 17, 2023, that Anas should unmasked to the accused in chambers before testifying in open court in a mask.
The Panel chaired by Justice Anthony Oppong with Justice Kweku Tawiah Ackaah-Boafo and Justice Aboagye Tandoh as other members quashed the High Court ruling and ordered Anas to remove his mask when testifying.was
“The Court concluded that the Republic (Appellant’s) appeal should be dismissed entirely, as the court below did not have jurisdiction to make the orders issued on May 17, 2023.
“The 1st Respondent’s (Nyantakyi’s) appeal succeeds,” and “Anas must remove his mask when testifying,” the Court of Appeal ordered.
The High Court per its ruling on May 17, 2023, following an application from the prosecution for Anas to testify in-camera, granted the request but on grounds that Anas first unmasked to Nyantakyi in Chambers before testifying.
Both Prosecution and defence disagreed with the outcome of the High Court ruling and the Prosecution filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal.
Justice Kweku Tawiah Ackaah-Boafo, a member of the panel who wrote the lead judgment said, the physical presence of an unmasked witness is emphasized as essential for credibility assessments and, in cases where identity is contested, for confirming the witness’s identity.
He explained that, the adversarial nature of the criminal justice system relies on face-to-face confrontation, which is a fundamental right of the accused.
“Denying this right, particularly when the witness is the accuser, weakens the defence and the overall fairness of the trial,” the Court said.
The Court added that, the fairness of a trial must consider both the rights of the accused and the welfare of witnesses, ensuring accurate verdicts while upholding dignity.
While acknowledging the Republic’s argument that the order requiring Anas to reveal his face in chambers before testifying could endanger his life, the Court held that the Prosecution “failed to substantiate this claim with evidence and found that the security concerns highlighted by the State could be managed through existing judicial controls.”
It is the evaluation of the Court that, the argument that Anas’ exposure could endanger him due to the unresolved murder of Ahmed Suale was more emotional than factual.
“There was no evidence linking the Respondents to Suale’s death, and constitutional rights cannot be overridden without verifiable proof,” the Court held.
It explained that, “unlike an accused person’s right to a fair trial, a witness covering their face is not an inherent constitutional right,” while pointing an earlier Supreme Court decision, prioritizing constitutional provisions.
Anas’ peers, and classmates know him
The Court though acknowledging the Prosecution’s argument that Anas’s safety would be jeopardized if his identity were exposed, it disagreed, “making references to Anas’s own statement in the case record, where he is identified as both an “Investigative Journalist” and a ‘Lawyer.’”
The Court said, this indication means that that Anas “is known to many people, including peers and classmates, and thus the claim about the danger of him being seen in court was exaggerated and lacked merit.”
EIB Network’s Legal Affairs Correspondent, Murtala Inusah, who has been following proceedings on this matter reports that, it is only a matter of time and Nyantakyi and Abdulai Alhassan would be discharged if what Anas stated earlier is anything to go by the he will not testify unmasked.
Charges
The former GFA president was charged with fraud and corruption over his involvement in Anas Aremeyaw Anas’ investigative exposé, Number 12.
Mr. Nyantakyi, who is also facing the charge of conspiracy to commit fraud with the former Northern Regional representative of the GFA, Abdulai Alhassan, has pleaded not guilty.
The two football administrators have been admitted to their previous bail sum of GH₵1 million each with three sureties, to be justified. They are also required to report to the case investigator until the final determination of the case.
Background
The embattled former GFA president, Nyantakyi, came under heavy criticism after the content of Anas Aremeyaw Anas’ investigative piece entitled Number 12 was aired in Ghana on June 6, 2018.
The video captured Nyantakyi allegedly taking $65,000 (approximately £48,000) from an undercover reporter pretending to be a businessman.
The video, among other things, also captured top officials of the football association, including its president, Nyantakyi, allegedly taking bribes to influence the invitation of players to the national team, to influence the duration of playing time offered to some players, and to influence the selection of unfit players and referees to participate in games.
Number 12 also exposed more than 100 referees allegedly taking bribes to manipulate the outcome of games in favor of certain teams.
Following the first screening of the video, which attracted more than 3,000 people, many called for the complete dissolution of the Ghana Football Association (GFA) and the immediate resignation of its embattled president, Kwesi Nyantakyi.
Nyantakyi, who was also the first vice president of the Confederation of African Football (CAF), eventually resigned from all football-related positions shortly after the video was aired.
FIFA subsequently suspended Kwasi Nyantakyi and later banned him for life.
