Suit on attempted suicide struck out as ‘moot’
A seven-member panel of the court dismissed the case due to a recent legislative change by Parliament that decriminalized attempted suicide, thus making the legal challenge moot.
The Supreme Court has dismissed a case that challenged the constitutionality of the law criminalizing attempted suicide.
A seven-member panel of the court dismissed the case due to a recent legislative change by Parliament that decriminalized attempted suicide, thus making the legal challenge moot.
In March 2023, the Parliament of Ghana passed the Criminal Offences (Amendment) Bill, 2021, thus decriminalizing attempted suicide under Section 57 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29).
The amendment was informed by a Private Members Bill sponsored by the Chairman of the Constitutional and Legal Affairs Committee, Hon Kwame Anyimadu, and his ranking member, Bernard Ahiafor.
The suit in question was filed by private legal practitioner, Christian Malm-Hesse praying the Supreme Court to declare that there is no “mens rea” formed with respect to the committal of the inchoate offence of “attempt to commit suicide”
Malm-Hesse contended that section 57 (2) of the Criminal and other Offenses Act (1960) Act 29 which provides that “whoever attempts to commit suicide shall be guilty of a misdemeanour”, is an affront to mental health, its associated challenges and efforts of medical practitioners to deal with same.
Reliefs sought
According to the writ dated 8 May 2021, at the law offices of K-archy and company legal and management consultants, the plaintiff (Christian Malm-Hesse) sought five reliefs from the Supreme Court.
Firstly, “a declaration that there is no “mens rea” formed with respect to the committal of the inchoate offence of “attempt to commit suicide” contrary to section 57 (2) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 ACT 29 as amended and to that extent be expunged from the said Act”.
Secondly, a “declaration that section 57 (2) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 ACT 29 as amended is inconsistent with Articles 15 (1) (2) (a) and (b) of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana and to that extent be struck out.”
The third was a “declaration that section 57 (2) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 ACT 29 as amended is inconsistent with Articles 17(1) (2) and (3) of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana and to that extent be struck out.
A declaration that section 57 (2) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 ACT 29 as amended is inconsistent with Articles 29 (4) of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana and to that extent be struck out” is the fourth relief of the plaintiff.
Lastly, Malm-Hesse is praying the Supreme Court to declare that “section 57 (2) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 ACT 29 as amended is inconsistent with sections 42 (1) (a) (b) and (2), 54 A (1), 55 (1) and (2) and 57 of Mental Health Act 2012 ACT 846 and to that extent be struck out”.
