Protection of Privacy of Communication and the Admissibility of Electronic Evidence: An Assessment of the Supreme Court’s Guidelines

Bediako, Ebenezer Adjei; Agyei, Kwadwo Bioh; Bewel, Daniel Bioyel

doi:10.1007/978-3-031-15397-6_4

Ebenezer Adjei Bediako⁴,
Kwadwo Bioh Agyei⁴ &
Daniel Bioyel Bewel⁴

166 Accesses

Abstract

Privacy of communication is a fundamental human rights under the 1992 Constitution of Ghana. Thus, every person in Ghana is protected from interference with his or her correspondence or communication. In the twenty-first century, internet and electronic communication devices have become integral part of daily lives. Consequently, electronic evidence is frequently tendered as exhibits in court cases. This calls into question how courts should treat electronic evidence obtained in breach of the right to privacy. This chapter assesses the constitutional and statutory parameters for the admissibility or exclusion of electronic evidence. It highlights the guidelines set by the Supreme Court of Ghana on the admissibility of electronic evidence obtained in breach of the right to privacy of communication.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

eBook: USD 16.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 139.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 139.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Section 51 of NRCD 323.
2.
Section 52 of NRCD 323.
3.
Sections 10 to 15 of NRCD 323.
4.
[2017–2018] 2 SCLRG 1; [2017–2020] 1 SCGLR 226.
5.
[2017–2020] 1 SCGLR 305; [2017–2018] 2 SCLRG 656.
6.
Suit No.: ECW/CCJ/APP/42/16, Judgment No.: ECW/CCJ/JUD/17/19 delivered on 29 April, 2019, available at https://ihrda.uwazi.io/en/entity/de29cjqp0m4?page=2 (accessed 10 June 2021).
7.
A/HRC/39/29, Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, available at https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G18/239/58/PDF/G1823958.pdf?OpenElement (accessed 22 August 2021).
8.
A Paper issued New Zealand Human Rights Commission, Privacy, Data and Technology: Human Rights Challenges in the Digital Age (2018 Auckland, New Zealand), available at https://www.hrc.co.nz/files/5715/2575/3415/Privacy_Data_Technology_-_Human_Rights_Challenges_in_the_Digital_Age_FINAL.pdf.
9.
Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, The right to privacy in the digital age, A/HRC/27/37 (dated 30 June 2014), available at https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G14/088/54/PDF/G1408854.pdf?OpenElement (accessed on 20 August 2021).
10.
Ibid.
11.
New Zealand Human Rights Commission (n9).
12.
Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (n8).
13.
A/RES/68/167: The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, Resolution Adopted by the UN General Assembly on 18 December 2013, available at https://undocs.org/pdf?symbol=en/a/res/68/167 (accessed on 22 August 2021).
14.
Global Internet Liberty Campaign, Privacy and Human Rights: An International Survey of Privacy Laws and Practice, available at http://gilc.org/privacy/survey/intro.html (accessed on 20 August 2021).
15.
New Zealand Human Rights Commission (n9).
16.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, available at https://www.un.org/en/udhrbook/pdf/udhr_booklet_en_web.pdf (accessed on 22 August 2021).
17.
Ban Ki-moon, available at https://www.un.org/en/udhrbook/pdf/udhr_booklet_en_web.pdf (accessed on 22 August 2021).
18.
United A/HRC/RES/42/15: The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, Resolution Adopted by the UN Human Rights Council on 26 September 2019.
19.
A/RES/68/167 (n16).
20.
UDHR, available at https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NEWSEVENTS/Pages/DigitalrecordoftheUDHR.aspx (accessed 22 August 2021).
21.
Status of Ratification of the ICCPR Interactive Dashboard, available at https://indicators.ohchr.org (accessed on 22 August 2021).
22.
Warren S. and Brandeis L., The Right to Privacy, Harvard Law Review 4, 1890, 193–220, cited in Global Internet Liberty Campaign (n15).
23.
Privacy as an Aspect of Human Dignity, [1964] 39 New York U. L.R. 962 at 971, cited in Global Internet Liberty Campaign (n15).
24.
Report of the Committee on Privacy and Related Matters, Chairman David Calcutt QC, 1990, Cmnd. 1102, London: HMSO, page 7, cited in Global Internet Liberty Campaign (n15).
25.
Greenleaf G. and Cottier B., Comparing African Data Privacy Laws: International, African and Regional Commitments [2020] 32 UNSWLRS, 1–39, pp. 4–5, available at http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLRS/2020/32.pdf (accessed 23 August 2021).
26.
Ibid.
27.
Yilma K. M., Data Privacy Law and Practice in Ethiopia (2017) 5 No 3 International Privacy Law, 177–189, page 179.
28.
Makulilo A. (Ed) African Data Privacy Laws (Springer, 2016) 17–18.
29.
Makulilo A. B., The Quest for Information Privacy in Africa (2018) 8 Journal of Information Policy, Penn State University Press), 317–337.
30.
Gutwirth, S., Privacy and the Information Age (Lanham/Boulder/New York/Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2002), 24–5.
31.
Solove, D., Understanding Privacy (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2009), 13.
32.
Available at https://privacyinternational.org/news-analysis/2227/privacy-international-62nd-session-african-commission-human-and-peoples-rights (accessed 23 January 2022).
33.
Yilma, K. M. and Birhanu, A., Safeguards of Right to Privacy in Ethiopia: A Critique of Laws and Practices (2013) 26, 1 Journal of Ethiopian Law, 94–152.
34.
Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (no 10).
35.
Greenleaf G. and Cottier B. (n27), 13.
36.
List of countries which have signed, ratified or acceded to the African Union Convention on Cyber-security and Personal Data Protection, https://au.int/sites/default/files/treaties/29560-sl-AFRICAN%20UNION%20CONVENTION%20ON%20CYBER%20SECURITY%20AND%20PERSONAL%20DATA%20PROTECTION.pdf (accessed 23 January 2022).
37.
Greenleaf G. and Cottier B. (n27).
38.
Makulilo A. (Ed) African Data Privacy Laws (Springer, 2016) p. 21, cited by Greenleaf G. and Cottier B. (n27).
39.
Ibid.
40.
Ibid., 5.
41.
Article 2 of the Supplementary Act, supra.
42.
Article 14 (1) and (2) ibid.
43.
Article 19(1) ibid.
44.
Article 36 ibid.
45.
Article 18 (2) of the Constitution of Ghana, 1992.
46.
Cubagee v Asare and others [2017–2018] 2 SCLRG 656.
47.
Data Protection Act, 2012 (Act 843).
48.
Long title to Act 843.
49.
Section 1(1) of Act 843.
50.
Section 2(a) of Act 843.
51.
Section 17 of Act 843. The data processor is required to take into account the principles of: (a) accountability, (b) lawfulness of processing, (c) specification of purpose, (d) compatibility of further processing with purpose of collection, (e) quality of information, (f) openness, (g) data security safeguards, and (h) data subject participation, when processing the data of an individual.
52.
Section 96 of Act 843 provides that a data processor means “any person other than an employee of the data controller who processes the data on behalf of the data.”
53.
An individual who is the subject of personal data; Section 96 of Act 843.
54.
Section 18(1) of Act 843.
55.
Section 46 of Act 843.
56.
Section 48(1)(b) of Act 843.
57.
National Communication Regulations, 2011 (LI 1991).
58.
These are the National Communications Authority, operators of electronic communications networks and providers of electronic communications services.
59.
Regulation 1(e) of LI 1991.
60.
Section 101 of Act 775; ““electronic communications” means any communication through the use of wire, radio optical or electromagnetic transmission emission or receiving system or any part of these.”
61.
Regulation 6(1)(a) to (g) of LI 1991.
62.
Section 101 of Act 775, ““electronic communications network” means any wire, radio, optical or electromagnetic transmission, emission or receiving system, or any part of these, used for the provision of electronic communications service.”
63.
Section 101 of Act 775; ““terminal equipment” means equipment on the user’s side of the network termination point that is connected directly or indirectly to electronic communications network by wire, radio, optical or electromagnetic means and with which a user can originate, process or terminate telecommunications.”
64.
Regulation 6(2) of LI 1991.
65.
Section 101 of Act 775,
66.
Regulation 6(5)(a) and (b) of LI 1991.
67.
Regulation 9(2) of LI 1991.
68.
National Communications Authority was established by the National Communications Authority Act, 2008 (Act 769). Its primary function is to regulate the provision of communications services in Ghana.
69.
Regulation 132(1) (b) of LI 1991.
70.
Gawu DA and Mensah RO, “COVID-19 Contact Tracing and Privacy Rights in Ghana: A Critical Analysis of the Establishment of Emergency Communications System Instrument, 2020 (EI 63)” (2021) 65 Journal of African Law 361.
71.
Para 1 of EI 63.
72.
Suit no HR 0064/2020, GJ 0855/2020 available at https://kasapafmonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/FRANCIS-KWARTENG-ARTHUR-V.-GHANA-TELECOMMUNICATIONS-COMPANY-LTD..pdf (accessed 31 January 2022).
73.
Article 125(1) of the Constitution, 1992.
74.
Owusu-Dapaa E. and Adjei Bediako E., Austerity in Civil Procedure: A Critical Assessment of the Impact of Global Economic Downturn on Civil Justice in Ghana, 8 Erasmus L. Rev. (2015) 210 at 212.
75.
Owusu-Dapaa E. and Adjei Bediako E., ibid.
76.
Section 14, NRCD 323.
77.
Hodge M. Malek Q. C. (Ed), Phipson on Evidence (Sweet & Maxwell), 18th Ed. Para 6–02, 160.
78.
Section 10 (1) of NRCD 323.
79.
Section 12(2) ibid.
80.
Hodge M. Malek, Q.C. (Ed), (n77), 160.
81.
Evelyn Offei v Yaw Asamoah [2018] 122 GMJ 186, 234, SC.
82.
Brown v Saltpond Ceramics Ltd [1979] GLR 409, 412, CA.
83.
1992 Constitution, article 19(1)(c).
84.
Section 13(1) of NRCD 323.
85.
Ibid.
86.
Sections 10 (2) and 13(2) Ibid.
87.
Hodge M. Malek, Q.C., (Ed), (n77) 161.
88.
Section 13 (1), NRCD 323.
89.
Duah v Yorkwa [1992–1993] 1 GLR 217, 227–228.
90.
Majolagbe v Larbi & others [1959] GLR 190, 192.
91.
Section 1(4) of NRCD 323.
92.
Mason S. (Ed), Electronic Evidence: Disclosure, Discovery & Admissibility (LexisNexis Butterworths, London, 2007).
93.
Omolaye–Ajileye A., A Guide to Admissibility of Electronic Evidence (LawLord Publications, 2016 Ed.) 24.
94.
Ibid., 25.
95.
Ibid.
96.
Ibid.
97.
Ibid.
98.
Brobbey S. A., Essentials of the Ghana Law of Evidence (Datro Publications, 2014), 272.
99.
Omychund v Barker (1745) 1 Atk 21.
100.
Hodge M. Malek, Q.C., (Ed), (no 77) Para 41–02, 1410.
101.
van de Merwe DP (Ed), Information Communications Technology Law, (LexisNexis) 2nd Ed. 108.
102.
Khaled, “The Evidential Provisions of the ECT Act 25 of 2002: A Comparative Law Perspective” cited by van de Merwe, ibid.
103.
Tapper, Computer Law xxiii, cited by van de Merwe, (n101), 6.
104.
[1969] 2 QB 37.
105.
Ibid., 44.
106.
(1982) 75 Cr. App. Rep. 149.
107.
Ibid., 152. Also, Masquerade Music Ltd v Springsteen [2001] EWCA Civ 513; [2001] 1 C.P.L.R 369; [2001] E.M.L.R 25.
108.
Evidence Act, 1975 (NRCD 323).
109.
Section 163(3), ibid.
110.
Commentary on the Evidence Decree (now Act), 1975 (NRCD 323), p 124.
111.
Section 142 ibid.
112.
Section 163(3) ibid.
113.
Electronic Transactions Act, 2008 (Act 772).
114.
The long title of Act 772.
115.
Section 1(1) ibid.
116.
Section 2 ibid.
117.
Section 3(1) ibid.
118.
Section 3(3) ibid.
119.
Section 4 of ibid.
120.
Bill of Exchange Act, 1961 (Act 55).
121.
Powers of Attorney Act, 1998 (Act 549).
122.
Trustees Incorporation Act, 1962 (Act 106).
123.
Wills Act, 1971 (Act 360).
124.
Land Act, 2021 (Act 1037). ETA pre-dates Act 1037. However, transactions in landed property are comprehensively governed by Act 1037, which now permits electronic execution of conveyances.
125.
Hofman, “The meaning of the exclusions in section 4 of the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002” 2007 SALJ 262 cited in DP van de Merwe, (n104), 115,
126.
Halsbury’s Laws of England, 4th ed, vol 44(1), para 1300, generalia specialibus non derogant (general things do not derogate from special things).
127.
Section 5 of the Act 772.
128.
Land Act, 2021 (Act 1037).
129.
Section 73(1) and (2), Ibid.
130.
Section 78(a), (b) and (c) ibid.
131.
Section 7(1) of Act 772.
132.
Section 7(2) (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Act 772.
133.
van de Merwe DP (n101), 120.
134.
Ibid.
135.
Section 8(1) of Act 772.
136.
(Civil Appeal No. J4/04/2019) dated 3 April 2019, available at https://ghalii.org/gh/judgment/supreme-court/2019/18 (accessed 18 August 2021).
137.
Section 144 of Act 772, an automated transaction means “an electronic transaction conducted or performed, in whole or in part, by means of electronic records in which the conduct or electronic records of one or both parties are not reviewed by an individual in the ordinary course of the individual’s business or employment.”
138.
Section 196 (1) of the NRCD 323.
139.
van der Merwe (n101) at 121.
140.
Addadzi-Koom M. E. and Adjei Bediako E., Implementing an E-Justice System in Ghana: Prospects, Risks, Challenges and Lessons from Best Practices, (2019) 8 KNUST L.J. 108, 127.
141.
Ibid., 134.
142.
Multimedia Group Ltd v Despite Music Production Ltd and Anor., unreported (Suit No.: CM/BDC/0803/2021), High Court, Commercial Division, Accra.
143.
Filed pursuant to Order 21 rule 8(1) of CI 47.
144.
Counsel for the 1^st defendant is Dennis Adjei Dwomoh.
145.
Addadzi-Koom M. E. and Adjei Bediako E. (n 140) at 110.
146.
Albete K. D. C., Privacy of Communications and Correspondence, available at https://www.scribd.com/doc/119721869/Privacy-of-Communications-and-Correspondence (accessed 18 August 2021).
147.
[2017–2018] 2 SCLRG 1; See also [2017–2020] 1 SCGLR 226.
148.
Ibid. at 290.
149.
Ibid. at 292. Also, Republic v Tommy Thompson Books Ltd, Quarcoo & Coomson [1996–97] SCGLR 804 at 846.
150.
Ibid. at 295.
151.
Ibid.
152.
Ibid.
153.
Ibid. at 297.
154.
[2017–2020] 1 SCGLR 305; also [2017–2018] 2 SCLRG 656.
155.
Article 130(2) of the Constitution requires that provides that: ‘(2) Where an issue that relates to a matter or question referred to in clause (1) of this article arises in any proceedings in a court other than the Supreme Court, that court shall stay the proceedings and refer the question of law involved to the Supreme Court for determination and the Court in which the question arose shall dispose of the case in accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court.’ See also Republic v High Court (Commercial Division), Accra: Ex Parte Attorney-General (Balkan Energy Ghana Ltd & Ors Interested Parties) [2011] 2 SCGLR 1183 at pp. 1190–1191.
156.
Page 313–314 of (n147).
157.
Sections 51 and 52 NRCD 323.
158.
Page 313–315 of (n147).
159.
Page 322 of (n147).
160.
Page 323 of (n147).
161.
With regard to discretionary exclusion rule, the court held that there are provisions in the South African Constitution, 1996, Section 24(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982 and Article 69(7) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 1998 provides for the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of human rights only upon stated grounds.
162.
With regard to the automatic exclusionary rule, the Supreme Court held that there is the practice whereby any evidence obtained involving any infraction of human rights must be excluded by the court. It evolved from decisions of the United States Supreme Court.
163.
Page 323 of (n147).
164.
Ibid.
165.
[2017–2020] 1 SCGLR 305 at 324.
166.
Article 129 (3).
167.
(Suit No.: ECW/CCJ/APP/42/16, Judgment No.: ECW/CCJ/JUD/17/19 delivered on 29 April 2019), available at https://ihrda.uwazi.io/en/entity/de29cjqp0m4?page=2 (accessed 10 June 2021).
168.
Ibid., 23.
169.
Article 29 (2) of UDHR provides: “(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.”
170.
ECW/CCJ/APP/42/16 (n171), 23–24.

References

A/HRC/39/29, Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, available at https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G18/239/58/PDF/G1823958.pdf?OpenElement (accessed 22 August 2021).
A/RES/68/167: The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, Resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly on 18 December 2013, available at https://undocs.org/pdf?symbol=en/a/res/68/167 (accessed on 22 August 2021).
Addadzi-Koom M. E. and Adjei Bediako E., Implementing an E-Justice System in Ghana: Prospects, Risks, Challenges and Lessons from Best Practices (2019) 8 KNUST L.J. 108.
Google Scholar
Albete K. D. C., Privacy of Communications and Correspondence, available at https://www.scribd.com/doc/119721869/Privacy-of-Communications-and-Correspondence (accessed on 22 August 2021).
Available at https://privacyinternational.org/news-analysis/2227/privacy-international-62nd-session-african-commission-human-and-peoples-rights (accessed 23 January 2022).
Ban Ki-moon, available at https://www.un.org/en/udhrbook/pdf/udhr_booklet_en_web.pdf (accessed on 22 August 2021).
Brobbey S. A., Essentials of the Ghana Law of Evidence (Datro Publications, 2014)
Google Scholar
Civil No. J4/04/2019 dated 3 April 2019, available at https://ghalii.org/gh/judgment/supreme-court/2019/18 (accessed 18 August 2021).
Commentary on the Evidence Decree (now Act), 1975 (NRCD 323).
Google Scholar
Committee on Privacy and Related Matters, Chairman David Calcutt QC, 1990, Cmnd. 1102, London: HMSO, page 7, cited in Global Internet Liberty Campaign.
Google Scholar
Gawu D. A. and Mensah R. O., COVID-19 Contact Tracing and Privacy Rights in Ghana: A Critical Analysis of the Establishment of Emergency Communications System Instrument, 2020 (EI 63). (2021) 65 Journal of African Law 361.
Google Scholar
Global Internet Liberty Campaign, Privacy and Human Rights: An International Survey of Privacy Laws and Practice, available at http://gilc.org/privacy/survey/intro.html (accessed on 20 August 2021).
Greenleaf G. and Cottier B., Comparing African Data Privacy Laws: International, African and Regional Commitments [2020] 32 UNSWLRS, 1–39, available at http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLRS/2020/32.pdf (accessed 23 August 2021).
Gutwirth, S., Privacy and the Information Age (Lanham/Boulder/New York/Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2002).
Google Scholar
Halsbury’s Laws of England, 4th ed, vol 44(1), para 1300.
Google Scholar
Hodge M. Malek, Q. C., (Ed), Phipson on Evidence (Sweet & Maxwell), 18th Ed.
Google Scholar
Hofman, The Meaning of the Exclusions in Section 4 of the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002, 2007 SALJ 262.
Google Scholar
Khaled, The Evidential Provisions of the ECT Act 25 of 2002: A Comparative Law Perspective, LLM dissertation, University of South Africa (2008).
Google Scholar
List of Countries Which Have Signed, Ratified or Acceded to the African Union Convention on Cyber-security and Personal Data Protection, https://au.int/sites/default/files/treaties/29560-sl-AFRICAN%20UNION%20CONVENTION%20ON%20CYBER%20SECURITY%20AND%20PERSONAL%20DATA%20PROTECTION.pdf (accessed 23 January 2022).
Makulilo A. (Ed) African Data Privacy Laws (Springer, 2016) 17.
Google Scholar
Makulilo A. B., The Quest for Information Privacy in Africa, (2018) 8 Journal of Information Policy (Penn State University Press), 317–337.
Google Scholar
Mason S. (Ed.), Electronic Evidence: Disclosure, Discovery & Admissibility (LexisNexis Butterworths, London, 2007).
Google Scholar
New Zealand Human Rights Commission, Privacy, Data and Technology: Human Rights Challenges in the Digital Age (2018 Auckland, New Zealand), available at https://www.hrc.co.nz/files/5715/2575/3415/Privacy_Data_Technology_-_Human_Rights_Challenges_in_the_Digital_Age_FINAL.pdf.
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, A/HRC/27/37 (dated 30 June 2014), available at https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G14/088/54/PDF/G1408854.pdf?OpenElement (accessed on 20 August 2021).
Omolaye–Ajileye A., A Guide to Admissibility of Electronic Evidence (LawLord Publications, 2016 Ed.), 24.
Google Scholar
Owusu-Dapaa, E. and Adjei Bediako, E., Austerity in Civil Procedure: A Critical Assessment of the Impact of Global Economic Downturn on Civil Justice in Ghana, 8 Erasmus L. Rev. (2015), 210.
Google Scholar
Privacy as an Aspect of Human Dignity, [1964] 39 New York U. L.R. 962 at 971, cited in Global Internet Liberty Campaign.
Google Scholar
Solove, D., Understanding Privacy (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2009).
Google Scholar
Status of Ratification of the ICCPR Interactive Dashboard, available at https://indicators.ohchr.org (accessed on 22 August 2021).
Suit no HR 0064/2020, GJ 0855/2020, available at https://kasapafmonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/FRANCIS-KWARTENG-ARTHUR-V.-GHANA-TELECOMMUNICATIONS-COMPANY-LTD..pdf (accessed 31 January 2022).
Tapper C., Computer Law xxiii, cited by van de Merwe.
Google Scholar
United A/HRC/RES/42/15: The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, Resolution Adopted by the UN Human Rights Council on 26 September 2019.
Google Scholar
van de Merwe D. P. (Ed), Information Communications Technology Law, 2nd Ed. (LexisNexis, 2016).
Google Scholar
Warren S. and Brandeis L., The Right to Privacy, Harvard Law Review 4 (1890), 193–220.
Article Google Scholar
Yilma K. M., Data Privacy Law and Practice in Ethiopia (2017) 5 No 3 International Privacy Law, 177–189.
Google Scholar
Yilma, K. M. and Birhanu, A., Safeguards of Right to Privacy in Ethiopia: A Critique of Laws and Practices, (2013) 26, 1 Journal of Ethiopian Law, 94–152.
Google Scholar

List of Cases

Abena Pokua Ackah v Agricultural Development Bank Ltd (ADB) [2017–2018] 2 SCLRG 1; see also [2017–2020] 1 SCGLR 226.
Google Scholar
Atuguba & Associates v Scipion Capital (UK) Ltd and Anor (Civil Appeal No. J4/04/2019) dated 3 April 2019 available at https://ghalii.org/gh/judgment/supreme-court/2019/18 (accessed 18 August 2021).
Brown v Saltpond Ceramics Ltd [1979] GLR 409, 412, CA.
Google Scholar
Cubagee v Asare and others [2017–2018] 2 SCLRG 656.
Google Scholar
Duah v Yorkwa [1992–1993] 1 GLR 217 at 227–228.
Google Scholar
Evelyn Offei v Yaw Asamoah [2018] 122 GMJ 186, 234, SC.
Google Scholar
Francis Kwarteng Arthur v Ghana Telecommunications Co Ltd and Four others, unreported. Suit no HR 0064/2020, GJ 0855/2020, available at https://kasapafmonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/FRANCIS-KWARTENG-ARTHUR-V.-GHANA-TELECOMMUNICATIONS-COMPANY-LTD..pdf (accessed January 31 2022).
Garton v. Hunter [1969] 2 QB 37.
Google Scholar
His Lordship Justice Paul Uuter Dery and others v The Republic of Ghana (Suit No.: ECW/CCJ/APP/42/16, Judgment No.: ECW/CCJ/JUD/17/19 delivered on 29 April 2019), available at https://ihrda.uwazi.io/en/entity/de29cjqp0m4?page=2 (accessed 10 June 2021).
Kajala v. Noble (1982) 75 Cr. App. Rep. 149.
Google Scholar
Majolagbe v Larbi & others [1959] GLR 190.
Google Scholar
Masquerade Music Ltd v Springsteen [2001] EWCA Civ 513; [2001] 1 C.P.L.R 369; [2001] E.M.L.R 25.
Google Scholar
Multimedia Group Ltd v Despite Music Production Ltd and Anor., unreported (Suit No.: CM/BDC/0803/2021), High Court, Commercial Division, Accra.
Google Scholar
Omychund v Barker (1745) 1 Atk 21.
Google Scholar
Raphael Cubagee v Asare and Others [2017–2020] 1 SCGLR 305; also [2017–2018] 2 SCLRG 656.
Google Scholar
Republic v High Court (Commercial Division), Accra: Ex Parte Attorney-General (Balkan Energy Ghana Ltd & Ors Interested Parties) [2011] 2 SCGLR 1183 at pp. 1190–1191.
Google Scholar
Republic v Tommy Thompson Books Ltd, Quarcoo & Coomson [1996–1997] SCGLR 804.
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST), Kumasi, Ghana
Ebenezer Adjei Bediako, Kwadwo Bioh Agyei & Daniel Bioyel Bewel

Authors

Ebenezer Adjei Bediako
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Kwadwo Bioh Agyei
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Daniel Bioyel Bewel
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ebenezer Adjei Bediako .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Kumasi, Ghana
Maame Efua Addadzi-Koom
Sunyani, Ghana
Michael Addaney
Kumasi, Ghana
Lydia A. Nkansah

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bediako, E.A., Agyei, K.B., Bewel, D.B. (2022). Protection of Privacy of Communication and the Admissibility of Electronic Evidence: An Assessment of the Supreme Court’s Guidelines. In: Addadzi-Koom, M.E., Addaney, M., Nkansah, L.A. (eds) Democratic Governance, Law, and Development in Africa. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15397-6_4

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15397-6_4
Published: 11 December 2022
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-15396-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-15397-6
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics