THE ENVIRONMENT Drama In Court As…Judge Threatens Lawyer With Contempt Posted by on Apr 4, 2008, 02:16

Some High Court viewers have described the hot legal debate between two lawyers yesterday representing different chambers/firms at the High Court presided over by Justice D.E. Edwards as a drama, while others called it intellectual and professional arguments that set the court in a very fierce motion. The two lawyers, Sahid Sesay of the Law Firm of Serry Kamal and Co. representing Peter Blankson and a Ghanaian national and Ransford Johnson of the former Chief Justice’s Chamber known as Renner Thomas and Co. representing Bintumani Hotel.

Lawyer Sahid Sesay, who is the defense counsel had argued that the financial liability of Peter Blankson should not be the responsibility of the Ghanaian national who only stood as surety at the time Peter Blankson was arrested for the financial obligation he has failed to settle with the Bintumani Hotel.

According to the defense, Blankson was handed over to the Aberdeen Police when his surety was called upon to do so. His re-arrest and subsequent charge to court by the Congo Cross Police has nothing to do with his previous surety and for that reason Blankson;s liability should not be the concern of the Ghanaian national, referencing the letter from the Ghanaian High Commissioner to Sierra Leone, Dr(Mrs.) Mokowa.

Lawyer Ransford Johnson on the other hand is saying that the surety should bear the responsibility for taking the onus to stand as surety for Peter Blankson.

It would be recalled that in the same matter Justice Edwards had ruled in favour of Bintumani, for the sum of $22,000.00 (Twenty Two Thousand Dollars) to be paid by the Ghanaian national; failing which, his investment in Sierra Leone would suffer the consequences including bank accounts frozen.

The matter was referred to the same Judge for a review when lawyer Sahid Sesay filed in a petition in court against the ruling. Since it was Justice Edwards who initially presided over the matter, it was the consideration of the authorities of the court to refer the matter to him, which in the opinion of most legal practitioners and a cross section of the public was considered improper, for  he would in no way ruled against his previous decision.

The argument in yesterday’s trial was tensed and emotional with lawyer Sahid Sesay quoting various sections in the law books in defense of his client. But, Justice Edwards who may have perceived the argument of the defense counsel differently interpreted it wrongly to the point of threatening him with “contempt” In his response, lawyer Sesay said he was in court to defend his client and not to be treated like Kindergartens. He argued that they are in a court of law therefore legal argument precedes all other arguments and that the fact should be seen from an independent and legal point of view, and that he was not asking for any favour or relationship.

However, Justice Edwards has a long standing legal background. He has worked at the Freetown City Council as adviser and other areas, but his stance on the matter before him has raised serious concern among his colleagues and some legal practitioners who are suggesting that the matter should have been referred to another Judge for an independent and impartial ruling. It is now left with him to prove his doubting Thomas’s wrong.

Whatever be the outcome of the matter whether in favour of the Bintumani Hotel or the Ghanaian investor to Sierra Leone, whose fate is hanging on a thin legal thread, it is speculated that the matter will finally end up at the Appeal Court.