Youth activist Ivan Kyei Innocent insists the Court of Appeal’s decision in the Sedina Tamakloe case should not be interpreted as a declaration that the former MASLOC Chief Executive Officer is innocent.
Speaking on Joy Prime, Ivan Kyei Innocent said anyone who carefully reads the judgment would recognise that the court’s decision was based on legal standards rather than a finding that Tamakloe had committed no wrongdoing.
“I have read the judgment. Nobody will read this judgment and come to the conclusion that Sedina Tamakloe is innocent,” he said.
According to him, the criminal justice system requires prosecutors to establish a case beyond reasonable doubt before a conviction can be secured.
“You need to prove beyond reasonable doubt, not foolish doubt,” he stated.
Ivan Kyei Innocent argued that while the court overturned the conviction, the judgment should not be interpreted as clearing Tamakloe of every allegation.
“She is not innocent. For me, if you look at the circumstances, she cannot call herself innocent,” he said.
He maintained that the inability to secure or sustain a conviction does not necessarily amount to a finding that an accused person bears no responsibility.
“To convict somebody, there are certain standards that must be proven. The standard in criminal prosecution is proof beyond reasonable doubt,” he explained.
According to him, the distinction between an acquittal and a declaration of innocence is important when discussing the Court of Appeal’s ruling.
