Published February 14, 2026
On February 5, 2026, the High Court, Amasaman reduced the 15 year sentence imposed by an Accra Circuit Court on Patricia Aseidu (“ Nana Agradaa”) to 12months.
The court, presided over by Justice Solomon Oppong-Twumasi, reduced the sentence after it upheld an appeal by Agradaa that the sentence imposed on her by the trial Circuit Court was harsh and excessive. The reduced sentence takes effect from 3rd July, 2025, when the original sentence by the Circuit Court was imposed.
As was expected, this new development has generated lots of divergent public and media reactions. While some have welcomed it believing that the original sentence was harsh, others have criticized it, saying that the sentence will erode public confidence in the justice system, with some calling for the Attorney-General and the State for that matter to file an appeal to reverse the sentence.
It is important to state that in imposing sentence- whether in an original sentence or on appeal- judges and magistrates are enjoined to take some factors into consideration:
These include the intrinsic seriousness of the offence; the degree of revulsion felt by law-abiding citizens in the society for the particular crime; the premeditation with which the criminal plan was executed; the prevalence of the crime within the particular locality where the offence took place, or in the country generally; the sudden increase in the incidence of the particular crime; and mitigating or aggravating circumstances such as extreme youth, good character, official and social position of the offender and the violent manner in which the offence was committed.
It would appear that in the particular case involving Nana Agradaa, the High Court judge in finding the sentence to be harsh and excessive, had found the fact of Nana Agradaa being a first offender and the amount of money involved as well as the order of the trial court for Nana Agradaa to refund an amount of GHC 1,000 to some victims as mitigating factors to justify the reduction of the sentence.
On the other hand, it would appear that the appellate court failed to consider the fact that the 15 years sentence by the trial Circuit Court Judge was to achieve deterrence, especially for someone of a high religious and social standing as Agradaa. The law has been that when a court sets out to deter a convict with a high sentence, it does not matter that the prisoner was a first offender.
What was of concern was the apparent lack of legal basis for calculating length of the custodial sentence imposed in monetary terms as if sentencing in criminal proceedings is a commercial exercise.
Ghanaians now await the next chapter in what is becoming a closely watched judicial saga. Suffice it to say that, the circumstances of the latest decision by the court presents and affords a compelling opportunity for the Attorney-General Department to lodge an appeal to test the High Court’s Decision.
