The Court of Appeal has ruled that renowned investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas must remove his mask before giving testimony as a witness in the trial of former Ghana Football Association (GFA) President Kwasi Nyantakyi and another accused person, who are facing criminal charges.
The Court of Appeal unanimously overturned a previous ruling by the trial High Court on May 17, 2023. The High Court had ordered that Anas Aremeyaw Anas should reveal his face to the accused in private chambers before testifying in court while wearing his mask. However, the panel, chaired by Justice Anthony Oppong and joined by Justices Kweku Tawiah Ackaah-Boafo and Aboagye Tandoh, quashed the High Court’s decision. They instructed that Anas must remove his mask when giving his testimony in open court.
“The Court concluded that the Republic (Appellant’s) appeal should be dismissed entirely, as the court below did not have jurisdiction to make the orders issued on May 17, 2023.
“The 1st Respondent’s (Nyantakyi’s) appeal succeeds,” and “Anas must remove his mask when testifying,” the Court of Appeal ordered.
In its ruling on May 17, 2023, the High Court granted a request from the prosecution for Anas to testify in-camera. However, the court stipulated that Anas must first reveal his face to Nyantakyi in private chambers before giving his testimony.
Both the prosecution and the defense disagreed with the High Court’s ruling. As a result, the prosecution filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal.
Justice Kweku Tawiah Ackaah-Boafo, a member of the panel who wrote the lead judgment, stated that the physical presence of an unmasked witness is crucial for assessing credibility.
He emphasized that, in cases where a witness’s identity is in question, it is necessary to confirm their identity. Justice Ackaah-Boafo further explained that the adversarial nature of the criminal justice system depends on face-to-face confrontation, which is a fundamental right of the accused.
“Denying this right, particularly when the witness is the accuser, weakens the defence and the overall fairness of the trial,” the Court said.
The Court emphasized that a fair trial must balance the rights of the accused and the welfare of witnesses, ensuring accuracy and dignity. It dismissed the prosecution’s claim that revealing Anas’s face could endanger him, as there was insufficient evidence to support this.
The Court found the argument about potential danger from the unresolved murder of Ahmed Suale to be more emotional than factual, noting there was no evidence linking the respondents to Suale’s death.
The Court clarified that, unlike an accused person’s right to a fair trial, a witness does not have a constitutional right to cover their face, citing a prior Supreme Court decision. It also disagreed with the prosecution’s safety concerns, referring to Anas’s own statement identifying him as both an investigative journalist and a lawyer.
EIB Network’s Legal Affairs Correspondent, Murtala Inusah, who has been following proceedings on this matter reports that, it is only a matter of time and Nyantakyi and Abdulai Alhassan would be discharged if what Anas stated earlier is anything to go by the he will not testify unmaske.
