Private legal practitioner Alex Gyamfi says a person convicted in absentia does not automatically lose the constitutional right to appeal against the conviction.

Gyamfi said the right to appeal is an important protection within Ghana’s criminal justice system and should remain available even where an accused person was not present during the trial.

Speaking on the Asaase Breakfast Show on Friday (31 July), he said the Court of Appeal’s decision to entertain an appeal in the case of former MASLOC Chief Executive OfficerSedinam Tamakloe-Attionu should not be viewed as an extraordinary development.

He explained that while the Supreme Court has the constitutional jurisdiction to interpret laws, the general principle that a person convicted of a criminal offence has a right to appeal remains well established.

“The point really is that it is trite law that once a person is convicted of an offence by a court of law… a person in criminal law has the right to appeal,” he said.

Mr Gyamfi noted that the circumstances of each case can affect how the right is exercised, including whether an appeal was filed within the prescribed period and whether there are sufficient grounds for allowing a delayed appeal.

He said courts can consider the circumstances surrounding a person’s absence and the broader implications for the administration of justice.

According to him, even where an accused person failed to appear for reasons attributable to their own conduct, the courts must still consider the protection of fundamental rights.

“For the purposes of protection of rights, it doesn’t matter whether it’s one person against the 33 million people of Ghana, the court will do that,” he said.

Gyamfi stressed that the Court of Appeal is not the final authority on constitutional interpretation and that the Supreme Court could ultimately determine some of the legal questions arising from the case.

He said the Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to interpret provisions of an Act of Parliament or other laws, meaning the issues surrounding trial in absentia could receive further judicial clarification if the case proceeds there.

He therefore welcomed the prospect of the case reaching the Supreme Court, saying it could provide an opportunity to settle outstanding legal questions and establish clearer guidance for future criminal proceedings.

The Attorney-General has indicated that the state intends to challenge the Court of Appeal’s decision, meaning the legal controversy surrounding the conviction could continue before the Supreme Court.