Sammy Crabbe In Court

By Mary Anane

AN ACCRA HUMAN Right Court would on July 28, 2009 give a ruling on whether the Bureau of National Investigations BNI had the right to have refused the New Patriotic Party Regional Chairman, Samuel Crabbe, access to counsel when he was invited for interrogation recently at the BNI office.


The Regional Chairman, who believed that his fundamental human right had been trampled upon by the BNI authorities when they refused his counsel an opportunity to sit in the proceeding during the interrogation, dragged the authorities and the Attorney General to court to seek redress.


Mr. Crabbe, a businessman, was seeking a declaration that the BNI’s refusal to allow him get access to counsel was unconstitutional and infringes on his human right.


He was also seeking an injunction to restrain BNI officers from any further act of restricting the applicant or any other Ghanaian to acquire a counsel when they invite them for interrogation.


Counsel for the plaintiff, Kwame Boateng, was allowed by the court presided over by Justice U.P.Dery to move his motion in the absence of the defendants, after the judge was satisfied that the defendants had been served with the writ but had failed to appear before him to respond to the application.


According to counsel, neither the BNI nor the Attorney General had filed their affidavit in opposition to the case.

Mr. Boateng told the court that on June 11, 2009, Mr. Crabbe was invited to the BNI office without any reasons given him.


The applicant, who obliged to the call, he said, asked his counsel to go with him to the office as he did not know what he was going to be interrogated upon.


However, after going through all the necessary procedures, the applicant was informed that he could not have access to counsel.


When he inquired why he could not bring in his counsel, he was told that it was the standard procedure of the BNI. Although the applicant protested, he was interrogated without his counsel. Counsel said again, on June 17, 2009 a similar incident occurred.


Citing Article 12 clause 1 and 14 (1), ( 2) of the human right provision which protects the personal liberty of individual to buttress his argument, Mr. Boateng noted that what happened at the office had violated the fundamental human right of his client and was therefore seeking those declaration to restore his right.