Renowned legal academic and governance advocate, Prof. Stephen Kwaku Asare, widely known as Kwaku Azar, has delivered a sharp rebuke of the Amasaman H
Renowned legal academic and governance advocate, Prof. Stephen Kwaku Asare, widely known as Kwaku Azar, has delivered a sharp rebuke of the Amasaman High Court’s decision to slash the prison term of controversial evangelist Nana Agradaa from 15 years to just 12 months, describing the ruling as deeply problematic and harmful to the integrity of Ghana’s justice system.
In a strongly worded commentary shared on Facebook, Prof. Asare argued that the court’s intervention lacked sound legal grounding, especially after the appellate judge conceded that the trial court had acted properly and within the confines of the law when imposing the original sentence.
According to him, once the appellate court accepted that the lower court exercised its discretion lawfully, there was no legitimate basis to tamper with the punishment.
He explained that appellate review of sentencing is narrowly defined and should only occur where there has been a clear error in law or a misuse of judicial discretion.
Prof. Asare criticised the reasoning adopted by the appellate court, accusing it of abandoning established legal standards in favour of personal reflections.
He noted that the judgment leaned heavily on figurative language, religious allusions, moral musings and expressions of discomfort, rather than grounding its conclusions in sentencing principles, precedent, or structured legal analysis.
He further pointed out that although the court labelled the original 15-year sentence as excessive, it failed to demonstrate how the trial court erred in applying aggravating factors such as intentional deception, absence of remorse, exploitation of religious faith, the vulnerability of victims, and the widespread nature of similar fraudulent schemes.
In his view, reducing the sentence to 12 months amounted to an extreme swing that trivialised the gravity of the offence.
The legal scholar also took issue with the court’s apparent emphasis on the monetary amounts involved, stressing that fraud should not be evaluated solely on figures.
He argued that the true weight of such crimes lies in the method used, the betrayal of trust, and the broader social harm inflicted, not merely the sums collected from a limited number of complainants.
Prof. Asare warned that the revised sentence significantly weakens deterrence, particularly when the court itself acknowledged that religiously motivated fraud is prevalent and often preys on society’s most vulnerable.
He cautioned that the ruling risks signalling that deliberate and calculated fraud may attract only minimal consequences, potentially emboldening others and shaping a troubling judicial precedent.
Calling for the State to challenge the decision, Prof. Asare maintained that the appellate court misapplied its discretion, relied on irrelevant considerations, and jeopardised public confidence in the criminal justice system.
He emphasised that the issue transcends Nana Agradaa as an individual and speaks to the broader need for consistency, proportionality and fairness in sentencing, warning against any perception that notoriety or public profile can influence judicial outcomes.
The Amasaman High Court recently reduced Nana Agradaa’s 15-year custodial sentence to 12 calendar months after describing the original punishment as unduly harsh, while still affirming her conviction for charlatanic advertisement and defrauding by false pretence.
The revised sentence is to run from July 3, 2025, the date of her conviction.
Nana Agradaa, a former traditional priestess who later rebranded as a Christian evangelist, was convicted over a 2022 televised scheme in which she claimed to possess supernatural powers to multiply money.
Victims parted with cash based on these claims, which were never honoured.
COMMENTS