High Court overlooked aggravating factors in Agradaa’s case – Legal practitioner

Private legal practitioner, Prince Benson Mankotam, has criticised the High Court’s decision to reduce the 15-year jail sentence handed to Evangelist Patricia Asiedua, popularly known as Nana Agradaa, to one year, arguing that the court failed to adequately consider key aggravating factors associated with the offence.

Speaking on Starr Showbiz with Feeling Daddy on Starr 103.5 FM on Saturday, February 7, Mankotam said the offence of defrauding by false pretence, for which Nana Agradaa was convicted, carries serious legal implications under Ghanaian law and should attract a custodial sentence that reflects its gravity.

According to him, defrauding by false pretence is classified as a second-degree felony, with sentencing guidelines allowing for a maximum of 25 years’ imprisonment. “This is a second-degree felony offence. The maximum sentence is 25 years,” he stated.

Mankotam noted that while sentencing remains within the discretion of the court, that discretion must be exercised in line with established sentencing guidelines, particularly where aggravating factors are present.

He explained that in Nana Agradaa’s case, several aggravating factors should have weighed heavily in the court’s determination, including the abuse of religious authority and the vulnerability of the victims.

“One of the most serious aggravating factors here is the use of religion to defraud people. The victims were vulnerable, and she held herself out as a pastor. That alone is a gross aggravating factor,” he said.

The lawyer further argued that the High Court’s reduction of the sentence to one year fell outside reasonable sentencing thresholds, especially considering that Circuit Courts, under normal circumstances, impose custodial sentences of up to five years for similar offences.

“Even if the court wanted to reduce the sentence, it should not have gone below five years. A one-year sentence does not align with the sentencing guidelines,” Mankotam asserted.

He added that the value of money involved or the number of complainants should not be the sole basis for reducing a sentence in cases involving fraud. “You don’t look only at the amount involved. The circumstances, the conduct of the accused, and the impact on victims are critical,” he said.

Mankotam also pointed out that Ghana’s sentencing guidelines were introduced to promote consistency and fairness in criminal justice outcomes, warning that overlooking aggravating factors could undermine public confidence in the system.

“The whole idea behind the sentencing guidelines was to ensure consistency. When courts overlook clear aggravating factors, it creates confusion and sends the wrong signal,” he added.

He, however, noted that the reduced sentence is not final and can still be challenged through the appropriate legal channels. “The Attorney-General has the right to appeal the sentence if they believe it does not meet the ends of justice,” he stated.

The High Court in Amasaman on February 5, 2026, significantly reduced the 15-year prison sentence handed down to Evangelist Patricia Asiedua, popularly known as Nana Agradaa, to just one year. The court’s decision followed her appeal against the original sentence for defrauding by false pretences, which involved duping church members of Gh¢1,000 during an all-night service at her Weija-based church.