Case of the week:The Republic v. Cephas Agbebianu Anani

Court of Appeal, Criminal Appeal No. H2/06/2021 | Judgment delivered: 11 March 2022
Coram: Ofoe (Mr.) JA (Presiding), Bartels-Kodwo (Mrs.) JA, Bernasko Essah (Mrs.) JA

Introduction

Can nude images voluntarily shared through online interaction become the subject of defrauding by false pretences, extortion, and publication of obscene material contrary to the criminal Offences Act, 1960 (act 29)

This case examined how impersonation, deception, and threats operate as criminal conduct when committed through modern means of communication, and clarified how consent obtained through misrepresentation is treated in law. It also restated how criminal intent is inferred from conduct rather than excuses offered by an accused person.

Facts

The complainant, Delight Koffie, a teacher resident at Gbe-Kledjo in the Volta Region, entered into an online interaction between December 2018 and January 2019 with a Facebook user identified as “Gwada Thoni,” whose display picture was that of Prince William of the United Kingdom.

Unknown to her, the account was operated by Cephas Agbebianu Anani, a refrigerator repair apprentice living in the same town.

Believing she was communicating with a foreign national, the complainant was induced to send nude photographs and videos of herself. After receiving the materials, the accused disclosed that he knew her personally and resided in her community.

He then threatened to expose the images unless the complainant either paid GHS 2,000, or submitted to sexual intercourse on ten occasions.

To reinforce the threat, the accused sent the complainant nude images of another woman, Edna, whom he claimed had previously complied with similar demands.

When the complainant stated she could not raise the money, the accused demanded GHS 100 to book a hotel for the sexual encounter. The matter was reported to the police. Although the accused escaped arrest at the hotel, he was later apprehended.

At the end of trial, he was convicted on three counts:

1. Defrauding by false pretences
2. Extortion
3. Publication of obscene material

He was sentenced to five (5) years’ imprisonment on the first two counts and three (3) years on the third count, to run concurrently.

Issues for Determination

1. Whether impersonating another person to obtain nude images constitutes defrauding by false pretences.
2. Whether demanding money or sexual favours under threat of exposure amounts to extortion, notwithstanding claims of lack of intent.
3. Whether forwarding nude images to another person amounts to publication of obscene material.
4. Whether the sentence imposed was harsh or excessive.

The Court’s Holding

The Court of Appeal unanimously held that:

i. Defrauding by False Pretences
The accused deliberately misrepresented his identity. The complainant’s consent to share her images was therefore obtained by deception, and under section 133(2)(d) of Act 29, it was immaterial that she acted voluntarily or retained copies of the images.

ii. Extortion
The accused’s conduct – threatening exposure in exchange for money or sex – clearly satisfied both the act and intent required for extortion. Criminal intent was inferred from his actions, including the demand for hotel fees and his appearance at the agreed venue.

iii. Publication of Obscene Material
By sending nude images of Edna to the complainant, the accused had published an obscene representation within the meaning of section 280 of Act 29. Publication was not limited to books or writings; visual images and videos were included.

iv. Sentence
The sentences imposed were within statutory limits and could not be described as harsh. The trial judge properly considered both mitigating and aggravating factors.

     The appeal was accordingly dismissed.

Implication of the Decision

This decision affirms that criminal law principles of defrauding by false pretenses, extortion, and obscenity apply fully to misconduct carried out through modern communication platforms. Voluntary participation does not excuse conduct rooted in impersonation and threats, and courts will protect personal dignity against exploitation.

Significant quote

“Every now and again, cases, similar in nature to this one being dealt with crop up elsewhere in our jurisdiction. It appears this is an insidious canker taking root in our social fiber. It ought to be curbed. As a result the message should go out clearly that morally bankrupt behavior will not be tolerated. There should therefore be the signal to stem it or stop it.” – JANAPARE A. BARTELS-KODWO (MRS.)J.A

Commentary and Insight

Republic v. Anani demonstrates the adaptability of established criminal law doctrines to contemporary forms of interaction. The Court’s reasoning reinforces that misrepresentation vitiates consent, intent is judged objectively, and publication is not confined to mass dissemination.

For practitioners and students, the case remains a strong authority on defrauding by false pretences, extortion, and obscene publications, and underscores the judiciary’s firm stance against exploitation disguised as private interaction.