Case of the Week: Valentino Gligah and Abdulai Aziz Atiso v. The Republic

Supreme Court · [2010] CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. J3/4/2009 · Ghana

Introduction:

This case is about the criminal offence of rape and its legal intricacies and how the offence can be established at trial.

Facts:

On 22 June 1998, Cynthia Nyante, a trader selling secondhand clothes near the Central Police Station in Accra, was called by two policemen – G/CPL Valentino Gligah and EC/1 Abdulai Aziz Atiso- into their office. She alleged that once inside, they pushed her into a store room, locked the door, and took turns raping her.

Following the incident, Cynthia reported the matter. A medical examination confirmed vaginal injuries and the presence of semen. During investigations, police recovered her earring from the room, consistent with her account. Several witnesses, including a policewoman nearby and the medical officer, corroborated aspects of her story.

The accused officers denied the allegation. They claimed Cynthia had been in a prior consensual relationship with Gligah and that the complaint arose from a dispute over an abortion and money.

Despite their defence, the evidence led to their conviction by a jury and a sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment each. They appealed the decision to the Supreme Court.

Holding:

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence. The Court held that:

1. The essential ingredients of rape- carnal knowledge without consent- had been proven through direct and circumstantial evidence.
2. The failure to call a certain police officer (ASP Caulley), claimed by appellants to be a material witness, did not prejudice the case. The existing evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.

Implications of the decision:

1. The Court underscored that in criminal trials, the prosecution bears the full burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, aligning with Article 19(2)(c) of the 1992 Constitution.

• The Court reiterated that rape can be proven through a combination of direct testimony and corroborating circumstantial evidence.

Significant quote:

“Section 99 of Act, 29 defines Rape as “carnal knowledge of a female without her consent.”

“Carnal knowledge is the penetration of a woman’s vagina by a man’s penis. It does not really matter how deep or however little the penis went into the vagina. So long as there was some penetration beyond what is known as brush work, penetration would be deemed to have occurred and carnal knowledge taken to have been completed.” – Dotse JSC

Commentary and Insight:

This case highlights the seriousness with which the courts treat rape allegations, especially when committed by people in positions of trust like police officers.

This is seen in the observations of Dotse JSC ( as he then was ) who appeared to suggest that in appropriate circumstances, trial courts should be imposing far more deterrent sentences in cases of rape- particularly where the offence is committed by persons in public trust such as police officers- to help address the alarming presence of rape cases in Ghana.

The decision further affirms that rape can be proven without eyewitnesses, and the threshold for what may be considered rape as defined by the case is very narrow. This ought to serve as a sober caution (particularly to men) that only clear, affirmative, and informed consent renders sexual conduct lawful. Anything short of that may invite serious legal peril.

The decision also reaffirms or highlights the role of circumstantial evidence in proving the guilt of an accused; underscoring that as long as the circumstantial evidence is credible, cogent and consistent, it may be sufficient to establish the guilt of an accused in criminal proceedings.