
Kwaku Azar writes:
- Bail is granted to Afoko by a High Court in March, 2019
- He fulfills all the bail conditions set by the Court.
- In fact his brother/relative Snr. Afoko stands surety for him and use property worth 10 times more than the bail amount as justification.
- Government through the Police refuses to release Afoko on bail in flagrant disregard of the decision of the people ( the Courts dispense justice on behalf of the people)
- Government further appeals to Court of Appeal to have the bail decision reversed but same is refused by the Court of Appeal.
- Despite the dismissal of the government’s decision, the Attorney General, superintends over the continuous unlawful detention of Afoko.
- Afoko through his lawyers cites the IGP and CID boss for contempt. Application for contempt is served on these people and AG appears to represent them in Court.
- IGP and CID boss refuse to attend court.
- AG applies to another Court to have the bail rescinded. And today, 15 July 2019 ( over months of blatant disregard for the Courts) another Court rescind’s the bail.
- Note that AG’s argument was essentially that Afoko will not attend court if the bail is not rescinded.
- Note also that AG did not lead any evidence to demonstrate how Afoko who is yet to be allowed the benefit of the doubt after a court granted him bail, will abscond frok the jurisdiction.
- Note also that as at today, AG could not establish as a fact that, Afoko has violated any of the bail conditions set by the previous judge to warrant the decision to rescind the bail.
- On what basis did the AG come to the conclusion that, a man who has been duly granted bail by a Court will not attend Court, when such a person has been in their custody for the past 3 years.
- Justice must not only be done, it must be seen. Do we see it in this case?
- Justice emanates from the people and shall be dispensed by the judiciary on behalf of the people so the law says or? Are the people seeing that justice?
- In the absence of any breach of the bail conditions set by the previous Court, how did the new court arrive at a decision to disturb the exercise of discretion of another judge?
- The Supreme court has held on several occassions that it will not disturb the exercise of discretion by a lower Court unless there are very compelling reasons such as a Wrongful exercise of discretion.
- Whether or not to grant bail is a discretion. Did the new judge find that there was wrongful exercise of discretion by the previous judge?
- We must take rights seriously in this country. Rights are to protect the individual from state but it appears the State is winning.
- We all dey inside. Ayooo
Same tactic has started against NAM1. Ayoo

