ADVERTISEMENT

Lawyer explains implications of SC ruling on non-bailable offences

The highest court of the land by a 5-2 Majority decision on Thursday struck down Section 96(7) of Act 30 declaring the law on non-bailable offences unconstitutional.

 

The ruling follows a suit filed by a private lawyer, Martin Kpebu on 16 February 2015, where he asked the apex court to declare that Section 96(7) of the Criminal Procedure and Juvenile Justice Act is unconstitutional.

Explaining the implications of the supreme court ruling, Lawyer Sosu told Pulse.com.gh that the ruling is "going to advance that constitutional guarantee for the liberty of every citizen so that when you are on bail and eventually you are found guilty of the offence, you are simply convicted to go and serve the sentence. It is far better than you, whiles you have not been pronounced guilty, yet you will be serving jail terms."

ADVERTISEMENT

The human rights lawyer added that with the ruling, all offences are "bailable so long as the person can boast of sufficient surety and can actually show that he is a man of means and he will be available to stand trial and there are people who are independent sureties with sufficient means who will also be able to sign bail for the person and the person can be bailed."

JOIN OUR PULSE COMMUNITY!

Unblock notifications in browser settings.
ADVERTISEMENT

Eyewitness? Submit your stories now via social or:

Email: eyewitness@pulse.com.gh

ADVERTISEMENT