Mathew M. Mannah And Another v S (CR APP 31 of 2006) [2008] SLCA 62 (6 December 2008)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF SIERI CR. APP. 34 AND 32/21 MATHEW MUSTAPHA MANNAH ) MOHAMED SYLVANUS KOROMA) - APPELLANTS AND THE STATE - RESPONDENT

Coram

Hon. Mr. Justice P.O. Hamilton JA (Presiding) Hon. Mr. Justice N.C. Browne-Marke JA Hon. Mr. Justice S.A. Ademosu JA SOLICITORS : E.N.B. Ngakui Esq., - for 1* Appellant MA. Beloku Sesay Esq. - —_ ‘for 2 Appellant Ms. Glenna Thompson - for Respondent Judgment delivered on the jit day ac 1—b- 2008. This is an Appeal by the Appellants herein Mathew Mustapha Mannah and Mohamed Sylvanus Koroma against their conviction and sentence by the High Court in Freetown presided over by Honourable Aki Kiiza J, on a four

(4) Count Indictment of the offence of CORRUPTION contrary to Section 8(1)(a) of the Anti-Corruption Act,

No. 1 of 200 ° 0 (As Amended). The Appellants wee convicted and sentenced on the 30” August, 2006. This Appeal is brought pursuant to Section 57(b) and 57(c) of the Courts Act, 1965 (as amended by Section 6 of Act No. 21 of 1966) and the powers of the Court of Appeal on the hearing of such an Appeal are fully spelt out in Section S. 58(1), 58(2), 58(3), 58(4) and Sections 59(1), 59(2) and 59(5) of the Courts Act supra. | will not reproduce these sections on this Judgment. The trial was held at the Freetown High Court as a result of the Anti Corruption Act No.1 of 2000 a (as amended) under which proceedings were taken: The Indictment which was preferred pursuant f0 the provisions of Section 38 of the Anti-Corruption Act No.1 of 2000 (as Amended) and filed reads as follows:- COUNT 4 ENCE: - STATEMENT OF OFF “trary to Section 8(tN(a) of the Antic Soliciting an advantage, °° Corruption Act, 2000 (as amended). ENCE: ‘ PARTICULARS OF OE ANNAH on an unknown date between " MATHEW MUSTAPHA ot at Port Loko District in Sierra Leone, July, 2001 and 31% Juv. on $90,000.00 (Five Hundred Thousand

did solicit an advantage Of

one “ Leones) male goat, one bag of rice and five (5) gallons of palm oil from one Idrissa Kanu, as an inducement to perform an act as a public officer. COUNT 2 STATEMENT OF OFFENCE: Soliciting an advantage, contrary to Section 8(1)(a) of the Anti- Corruption Act, 2000 (as amended). PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE: MATHEW MUSTAPHA MANNAH on an unknown date between 1" July, 2000 and 31% July, 2000 at Port Loko District in Sierra Leone did solicit an advantage of Le.500,000.00 (Five hundred thousand Leones) one male goat, one bag rice and five (6) gallons of palm oil from one Amadu Orab Thullah, as an inducement to perform an act as a public officer. COUNT 3 ENCE: - STATEMENT OF OFFENCE: trary to section 8(1Xa) of the Ant Soliciting an advantage, con! Corruption Act, 2000 (as amended). PARTICULARS OF acne on 25" January 2002 at Port MOHAMED syLvANUS KC iit an advantage of Le.500,000.00 sol : Loko District in Sierra Leon, did 1 one male goat one bag rice and (Five hundred thousand Leones)

BE

five gallons of palm oil from one Idrissa Kanu as an inducement to perform an act as a public officer. COUNT 4 STATEMENT OF OFFENCE: Accepting an advantage contrary to Section 8(1)(a) of the Anti- Corruption Act, 2000 (as amended). | PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE: MOHAMED SYLVANUS KOROMA on a day unknown between a September, 2001 and 31% January, 2002, at Port Loko District in Sierra Leone did accept an advantage of Le.200,000.00 (Two hundred thousand Leones) from AMADU ORAB THULLA as an inducement to perform an act as a public officer The trial properly commenced on 21* June, 2006 and the learned Trial Judge in his recorded ‘Judgment on 31% August, 2006 found 7 Appellant guilty on Counts 4 and 2 and 2 Appellant guilty on Counts 3 and 4 and sentence the 1" ‘Appellant to three months imprisonment on Counts 1 and 2 to run concurrently and the second Appellant to | three months imprisonment on Counts 3 and 4 to run concurrently. Itis against these verdicts of Guilty and sentence that bon Aerators have appealed to this Court on the following grounds of Appeal d cannot be supported 4) The Judgment is unreasonable an o idence before the Court having regard to the ev!

The pages read for this report end here. The judgment continues in the PDF.