Prerogative of mercy in Ghana case law.

The law generally is that pardon takes away the pain of incarceration or payment of money due to Government on account of any offence. It does not wipe out conviction.

THE REPUBLIC V. TSATSU TSIKATA SUIT NO. H2/6/2009 · 30 Nov 2016 [2016] SLR (CA) 1 · Court of Appeal · 2016 · DENNIS ADJEI JA

Where a convict is given a pardon, it is the sentence which is varied but where a person is acquitted on appeal, all the adverse findings made against that person by the Court which were discussed and set aside are completely erased from the record of that person and cannot be used against him in any forum.

THE REPUBLIC V. TSATSU TSIKATA SUIT NO. H2/6/2009 · 30 Nov 2016 [2016] SLR (CA) 1 · Court of Appeal · 2016 · DENNIS ADJEI JA

The position at common law is that pardon deals with sentence and payment of fine due to Government on account of any offence while appeals deal with both conviction and sentence. Prerogative of mercy and appeal are not mutually exclusive likewise appeal and judicial review in the nature of certiorari. In the case of R. v. Derek Bentley (deceased) [1998] EWCA Crim 2516 where the victim was given posthumous pardon in 1993 when it revealed that his execution emanating from his conviction was wrong and unfair. On 30th July, 1998, the Court of Appeal held that pardon and appeal are not mutually exclusive and it is an appeal which clothes the courts with jurisdiction to determine the case on its merits.

THE REPUBLIC V. TSATSU TSIKATA SUIT NO. H2/6/2009 · 30 Nov 2016 [2016] SLR (CA) 1 · Court of Appeal · 2016 · DENNIS ADJEI JA

The Appellant filed his appeal in accordance with the Constitution and therefore acquires a constitutional right to pursue his appeal and nothing can prevent him from pursuing same. It is an appeal which clothes an Appellant with capacity to invite the appellate court to determine all adverse findings made against the Appellant at the trial on merits. Where the Appellant is acquitted, all the previous findings of fact made against him and the judgment cannot be used in any forum to attack his credibility or to disqualify him from holding any public office where the law provides that a convict of a particular offence cannot hold. Where a person has been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction, it is only a court with competent jurisdiction which can pronounce on the validity or otherwise of the conviction and not the President in the exercise of prerogative of mercy under article 72 of the Constitution.

THE REPUBLIC V. TSATSU TSIKATA SUIT NO. H2/6/2009 · 30 Nov 2016 [2016] SLR (CA) 1 · Court of Appeal · 2016 · DENNIS ADJEI JA