Bobby Banson on legal ramifications of recent case discontinuance by AG
He explained that when this happens, the legal consequences differ significantly from a standard charge withdrawal.
.jpeg)
Private legal practitioner Bobby Banson has provided insights into the distinct legal implications of nolle prosequi compared to the withdrawal of charges in a court proceeding.
Speaking on JoyNews' The Law, Mr. Banson emphasized that only the Attorney General has the authority to enter a nolle prosequi.
He explained that when this happens, the legal consequences differ significantly from a standard charge withdrawal.
According to him, the stage at which a withdrawal occurs determines its effect, whereas a nolle prosequi simply leads to a dismissal but does not equate to an acquittal. He further clarified that the Attorney General can enter a nolle prosequi at any stage, even after both the prosecution and defense have concluded their cases and the matter is awaiting judgment.
On the other hand, he noted that a withdrawal depends on the timing. If it happens after the prosecution has presented its full case, it results in an acquittal, preventing any future prosecution on the same charges.
These clarifications come in the wake of recent decisions by the Attorney General to discontinue proceedings in several high-profile financial cases; Republic V Forson and Jakpa, Republic v Opuni and Agongo.