Justice Kweku Tawiah Ackaah-Boafo, a Justice of the Court of Appeal, has emphasized the need for thorough investigations, cautioning investigators against effecting arrest without independent evidence.
He said, arresting an individual solely based on another person’s statement, without a thorough independent investigation, poses significant risks.
On March 27, this year, the Court of Appeal panel of three presided over by Justice Janapare A. Bartels-Kodwo acquitted and discharged one Issaka Abubakar who had been sentenced together with others into prison for 40 years in 2011 for robbery.
This was after the panel held that the Appellant (Abubakar) was not properly identified as a perpetrator and there was no independent evidence connecting him to the crime.
The Court said, his conviction was largely based on questionable confessions of other
accused persons and given the high standard of proof in criminal cases, the prosecution failed to prove the appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Following from that, the Court of Appeal upheld the appeal against his conviction and ordered that, “The conviction and sentence imposed by the High Court on 22nd March 2011 are set aside.”
“The Appellant is acquitted of the charges of robbery and conspiracy to commit robbery and accordingly discharged,” the Court said.
The decision of the second highest court of the land was premised on grounds that, the police investigator who included the Appellant (Abubakar) as part of the conspirators of the crime admits that the only reason why the Appellant (Abubakar) was included as part of the accused persons is because his name was mentioned by the others.
Time to be blunt with investigators
Justice Ackaah-Boafo, a Justice of the Court of Appeal in his concurring opinion to the judgment said “the time has come to be blunt with investigators.”
“…Arresting an individual solely based on another person’s statement, without a thorough independent investigation, poses significant risks,” he said.
He highlighted the potential consequences of such practices, including wrongful arrests due to personal motives such as revenge, bias, or misidentification.
Justice Ackaah-Boafo noted that this approach can lead to arbitrary policing, fostering abuse of power and erosion of public trust in law enforcement.
The judge’s concerns stemmed from the appeal case, where the appellant was arrested based on statements from others, but no independent evidence linked him to the robbery.
He emphasized the importance of conducting proper investigations, supported by corroborating evidence, such as forensic proof, surveillance footage, and credible eyewitness testimony.
“The accuser may have personal motives—such as revenge, bias, misidentification, or even deliberate deception and deflection of attention from actual perpetrators—leading to wrongful arrests,” Justice Ackaah Boafo said.
“Moreover, such practices encourage arbitrary policing, fostering abuse of power and the erosion of public trust in law enforcement.”
He concluded that it is imperative for investigators to recognize the necessity of thorough investigations to uphold justice and mitigate the risks associated with inadequate investigations.
Below are exerpts of Justice Ackaah-Boafo’s concurring opinion to the judgment
My Lords, another aspect of this appeal on which I wish to express my opinion concerns the reason for the Appellant’s arrest in the first place. In my view, this case, like a few others I have had the opportunity to review, presents and reveals a troubling trend in the manner in which investigations are conducted by the police and prosecutions are carried out in our courts.
In this case, I question why the Appellant was arrested, as the Record of Appeal reveals that, apart from the statements of persons arrested alongside the Appellant—who indicated that he was part of the robbery—no independent evidence linking the Appellant to the robbery was obtained by the police….
My Lords, in my respectful opinion, the time has come to be blunt with investigators: arresting an individual solely based on another person’s statement, without a thorough independent investigation, poses significant risks.
Apart from the obvious ethical lapses inherent in a laissez-faire attitude towards investigating accusations, the accuser may have personal motives—such as revenge, bias, misidentification, or even deliberate deception and deflection of attention from actual perpetrators—leading to wrongful arrests.
Moreover, such practices encourage arbitrary policing, fostering abuse of power and the erosion of public trust in law enforcement.
They also create opportunities for individuals to manipulate the system for personal gain, using arrests to settle scores, eliminate rivals, or shield actual perpetrators.
It is imperative that investigators recognize the necessity of conducting proper investigations, supported by corroborating evidence—such as forensic proof, surveillance footage, and credible eyewitness testimony—to mitigate these risks and uphold justice.
End
