TSATSU TSIKATA  VRS THE REPUBLIC This case came before us by way of an appeal from the Judgment of the Court of Appeal, delivered on 27th November 2003, in which the latter court upheld the rejection by a High Court of a motion of submission of no case made after the close of the prosecution’s case. The appellant was arraigned before the High Court on three counts of wilfully causing financial loss to the state, contrary to section 179A(3)(a) of the Criminal Code, 1960(Act 29), as amended; and on a fourth count of intentionally misapplying public property, contrary to section 1(2) of the Public Property Protection Decree, 1977(SMCD 140).

Counsel for the Appellant and the Director of Public Prosecution have obliged us respectively with “Submissions On Behalf of Appellantâ€ and “Statement of Case by the Prosecution/Respondentâ€, along with a string of local and foreign judicial opinions to buttress their cases. The submissions by Appellant’s Counsel were rather detailed, and actually amounted to submissions within submissions. Nonetheless, because the liberty of his client is at stake, we will accord them the detailed consideration they deserve.

 GROUNDS OF APPEAL ;

The Appellant has filed nine grounds of appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal delivered on 27 November 2003. By regrouping and dealing with some of the grounds of appeal together in the Submission on Behalf of the Appellant, his Counsel implicitly acknowledges that there is some overlap between the various grounds.