Petition For The Release Of Three (3) Abudus

ABUDU ROYAL FAMILY

P. O. Box 53

Yendi.

June 8, 2010

The Attorney-General and Minister of Justice

Ministry of Justice

Accra

Dear Madam,

Petition For The Release Of Three (3) Abudus In

Unlawful Police Custody.

The Abudu Royal Family wish to draw the attention of your office to the continuous incarceration of three (3) members of our family in the cells of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and the Bureau of National Investigation (BNI). The three individuals, Abubakari Mahama, Mohammed Kojo, and Yakubu Mohammed, were among ten (10) members of the family who were arrested in connection with the murder of Ya-Na Yakubu Andani II and others in March 2002. The three were not listed in the bill of indictment filed on May 14th 2010 at the Magistrate Court where the 10 were earlier on remanded in Police custody. Your office failed to inform the Court that day that the State is not going to prefer any criminal charges against the three. A Chief State Attorney, Rexford Wiredu, disclosed to the media that the three will be released by your office on May 19, 2010 (Daily Guide, Wednesday, May 19, 2010, p.2). Unfortunately, the State has failed to fulfill its promise, and the 3 are still languishing in police cells.

The family was shocked and dismay when on May 31, 2010 the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) failed to appear in Court, and asked the judge to adjourn the case to June 14, 2010. Her letter pleading the Court for adjournment listed the six (6) suspects who have been indicted with the crime of conspiracy to murder. The above named three persons were conspicuously missing on the list. The DPP had opportunity to communicate to the judge that the State has not preferred any charges against these three individuals, and they should, therefore, be release by the Court. Unfortunately, the DPP deliberately remained silent about them in clear violation of their constitutional liberties guaranteed under Article 14 of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution. No reason was given to the Court as to why these three people should continue to remain in police custody. It is instructive to note that the two weeks remand in police custody granted by the trial judge had expired on May 19, 2010. Since the State had not indicated to the Court that the three were being indicted for any crime, there is absolutely no basis for which they should be deprived of their personal liberties.

SPEEDY TRIAL

It is sad for the course of justice in this country that the DPP could not delegate any of her lieutenants to represent the State on this matter in her absence. The family has reason to suspect that the State is deliberately adopting a delay strategy for the trial of the six indicted, and the release of the three who have not been charged with any crime. This suspicion is founded on the fact that we have been to Court for the same case, at least on two occasions, where the DPP was ably represented by Rexford Wiredu, the Chief State Attorney. Moreover, it is also a fact that the proceedings on May 31, 2010 were supposed to be two formalities of committing the six indicted to stand trial at a High Court and the release of the unindicted three. The DPP was fully aware that the case is not going to be tried at the Magistrate Court, and that any lawyer from her outfit could assist the Court in the two formalities without endangering the case of the prosecutor. It is a serious indictment of the office of the Attorney-General that no State Attorney can competently administer committal proceedings for indicted suspects and file application for the release of innocent suspects in the absence of the DPP.

We demand the immediate release of the three unindicted suspects from police custody and appropriate measures by your office to compensate them for the period that they were unlawfully imprisoned. We also seek speedy trial for the six indicted accused persons. We are reminded that the State informed a Human Rights High Court Judge that it was ready with a bill of indictment to commit the six to trial. We hope that this information to the judge was not intended to mislead the Human Rights Court which was considering an application for bail before it. We pray the State to, as a matter of urgency, ensure that the six are tried within a reasonable time as enjoined by the constitution. The State should bring an end to what is clearly an episode of dangerous experimentation with the lives and liberties of innocent citizens of this country. Just as the State seeks justice for the victims of March 2002 in Yendi, it should equally ensure justice and fair play for the accused persons.

SELECTIVE JUSTICE

We have serious concerns and doubts about your sincerity in the pursuit of justice for victims of March 2002. There is preponderance of evidence to support a charge of selective justice against you on this matter. Notwithstanding the fact that members from both the Abudu Gate and the Andani Gate were recommended by the Wuaku report to be charged with certain crimes, only members from the Abudu Gate are currently in custody awaiting trial. All ten suspects standing trial for the events of March 2002 are members of the Abudu Gate and known sympathizers of the opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP). None of the people mentioned in the Wuaku report as alleged criminals from the Andani Gate who are supporters of the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC) is on trial.

Page 85 of the Wuaku report has the names of people to be charged for the crime of UNLAWFUL MILITARY TRAINING. Included in this list are the names of Maama Mole and Bashiru Gyima, both members of the Andani Gate and supporters of the NDC. The two are currently enjoying their freedom in Yendi. However, you decided to charge Yidana Sugri, a member of the Abudu Gate and supporter of the NPP, for the same offence. Mr. Sugri has been conveniently charged under this offence because you could not charge him for the murder of the Ya-Na since he was acquitted by a competent court for the same crime (Double- Jeopardy). It is a travesty of justice that you would selectively charge Yidana Sugri for the offence, but failed to prosecute the two Andanis and NDC sympathizers as recommended by the Wuaku Commission.

The Wuaku report also recommended one Mohammed Achiana Abdul Salam @ Red to be charged under the offence of ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF WEAPONS. He is a member of the Andani Gate and a supporter of the NDC. Ironically, the said Mohammed Achiana Abdul Salam @ Red was among the people transported by your office from Tamale and Yendi to be interviewed and prepared as prosecution witnesses. While he was enjoying the comfort of a plush hotel located at East Legon (as reported by the Daily Guide, Monday April 19, 2010), innocent members of the Abudu Gate and supporters of the NPP were dealing with the harsh conditions of our country’s holding cells. The very fact that you will go to the extent of using persons alleged by the state to be criminals in your political persecution of innocent citizens is not only shameful, but an affront to the Ghanaian sense of fairness and the rule of law.

We have credible information that the April 10, 2010 security operation was to include the arrest of one Lawyer Ibrahim Mahama and the Gukpegu Gban-Lana (Tamale Regent) for their alleged involvement in recruiting warriors from Western Dagbon to go and fight for the Ya-Na in Yendi. However, a top level NDC meeting to sanction the operation dropped the two names from the list for political expedience. Both Lawyer Mahama and the regent are Andanis and supporters of the NDC (the learned lawyer is one of the CPP members who now support the NDC in the North because of the conflict).

CONCLUSION

The Abudu family has vested interest in the Dagbon Kingdom, and shall, therefore, cooperate with government in its effort to seek justice for the victims of March 2002. We believe there cannot be peace in Dagbon without justice. We also have the conviction that real justice is predicated on TRUTH, and that selective justice perpetuates injustice. We, therefore, demand justice for all, without discrimination on the basis of party affiliation or loyalty to a particular family Gate. We will continue to exercise our constitutional right to demonstrate as guaranteed under Article 21 of the 1992 Constitution, until the three are release from police custody and the family is convinced that the six indicted will be tried within reasonable time.

Thank You.

Yours Faithfully,

Dr. Ziblim Iddi

(Spokesperson of the Abudu Family)

P. O. Box LG64

University of Ghana

Legon.

Tel: 0246 050338

Cc:

The Chairman, CHRAJ;

The Country Representative, UNDP;