DIVISION: IN THE SUPREME COURT
DATE: 5TH APRIL, 1963
BEFORE: ADUMUA-BOSSMAN, OLLENNU AND BLAY JJ.S.C.
COUNSEL
Dr. de Graft-Johnson for the appellant.
D. F. Annan, Senior State Attorney, for the respondent.
JUDGMENT OF ADUMUA-BOSSMAN
In its judgment read by Ollennu J.S.C., the Supreme Court applying R v. Abisa Grunshie1 and R. v.
Adjei2 held that: It is not rule of law that an independent civilian should always be present to witness a
statement made by an accused person. It is a matter of propriety as one means of satisfying
[p.332] of [1963] 1 GLR 331
a court that a statement was voluntary. The principle is set out clearly in the headnotes to R. v. Adjei3
where the learned editor said:
“The desirability that an independent lay witness who understands what is being said should be present when
a voluntary statement is being taken by the police, and who signs the statement as a witness when it is
complete, is not a rule of law, the failure to comply with which will render a confession inadmissible as
evidence, but a principle for guidance, the object of which is to help authenticate the voluntary nature of the
statement.”
We adopt those words. All that it is intended to ensure is that a court should not admit a statement
allegedly made by an accused person to the police unless it is fully satisfied that it is a statement
voluntarily made by the accused.
DECISION
Appeal dismissed.
J. D.
