It is no longer news that President John Mahama on Monday remitted the sentences of the Montie 3 on compassionate grounds.
“The decision of His Excellency the President to remit their sentences on compassionate grounds follow a petition submitted to him by the contemnors appealing to the President to exercise his prerogative of mercy even as they continue to express deep remorse and regret for the unacceptable statements they made against the Judiciary,†a statement issued by the communications ministry said.
The decision to pardon Salifu Maase, aka, ‘Mugabe’, and panellists Alistair Nelson and Godwin Ako Gunn comes barely a month into the four-month jail sentence they were handed by the Supreme Court for contempt.
It has provoked anger in a section of the public and triggered consternation among many Ghanaians as to why President Mahama released the three men in what many have described as an unpopular decision.
Today, PrimeNewsGhana.com brings you five reasons that probably compelled the president to grant the pardon.
1. The Supreme Court’s judgement was widely considered harsh and unconstitutional
The four-month sentence of the Montie three was considered harsh by many members of the public, especially supporters of the governing National Democratic Congress (NDC).
In fact, some legal experts described the judgement as unconstitutional, noting that the Supreme Court had acted as prosecutor and judge in its own case.
Prominent among the lawyers who condemned the decision was Stephen Kwaku Asare, a law professor.
He said: "What started with a ban of Sammy Awuku from the Court's premises and spread to a 3 and 10 day imprisonment of Ken Kuranchie and Steve Atubiga respectively has now metastized into a full blown cancer that imposes 4 months prison terms and that devours directors, news entrepreneurs and radio hosts.
"The Supreme Court of Ghana is a clear and present danger to our liberties and the Constitution itself.
"Checks and balances require the President to invoke his pardon power immediately and for Parliament to enact a law to tame this constitutional cancer."
The president probably subscribed to this school of thought.
2. High-profile NDC personalities supported a pardon for Montie 3
There was overwhelming consensus within the NDC that the Montie 3 had been unfairly treated and must be pardoned.
NDC heavyweights such as Education Minister Prof. Jane Naana Opoku-Agyemang, Gender Minister Nana Oye Lithur and Foreign Minister Hannah Tetteh had their appended their signature to a petition that called for the three to be pardoned.
It would have been difficult for the president to ignore the concerns of such eminent personalities.
3. NDC party applied pressure on the president
The NDC party put pressure on the president to release the three because they were essentially working for the party when they got into trouble. Abandoning them in jail would have sent out the wrong signal to other party members who may then to think first of self-preservation instead of helping improve the fortunes of a party that would abandon them in times of trouble.
ALSO READ: NPP condemns Mahama over Montie 3 pardon
4. Elections are approaching
With elections approaching, abandoning the Montie three in jail would have left the NDC deeply divided. And ahead of what is expected to be a tight race against the NPP, the president could not afford distractions and internal wrangling. The decision to release the three one month into their sentence is an attempt to put the matter to rest before campaigning heats up.
5. It was legal
This was probably the most compelling basis upon which the president granted the pardon. It may not be popular, but it is entirely legal; he has the power under article 72 of the constitution to grant such pardons.
The articles states in part that:
“The president may, acting in consultation with the council of state,
(a) grant to a person convicted of an offence a pardon either free or subject to lawful conditions; or
(b) grant to a person a respite, either indefinite or for a specified period, from the execution of punishment imposed on him for an offence; or
(c) substitute a less severe form of punishment for a punishment imposed on a person for an offence; or
(d) remit the whole or part of a punishment imposed on a person or of a penalty or forfeiture otherwise due to Government on account of any offence.â€