Actress Rosemond Brown was facing charges of publication of obscene materials, engaging in domestic violence namely conduct that in any way undermines another person’s privacy or integrity, and engaging in domestic violence namely conduct that in any way detracts or is likely to detract from another person’s dignity and worth as a human being.

This was after she published a photo of herself and her son on his birthday.

Charge of aiding and abetment

Following the conviction of actress Rosemond Brown popularly known as Akuapem Poloo by the Accra circuit court on Friday April 16, 2020, there has since been numerous debates concerning imposition of a 90 days sanction among others.

However, in analyzing the nature of the offence (substantive offence), it is very critical to view roles played by individual actors (not excluding photographers – if any) during the commission of the crime.

According to section 20 (1) of the criminal and other offences Act (Act 29), Every person who, directly or indirectly, instigates, commands, counsels, procures, solicits, or in any manner purposely aids, facilitates, encourages, or promotes, whether by his act or presence or otherwise, and every person who does any act for the purpose of aiding, facilitating, encouraging or promoting the commission of a crime by any other person, whether known or unknown, certain or uncertain, is guilty of abetting that crime, and of abetting the other person in respect of that crime.

In simple terms, a crime is usually committed by an accused person called a principal; however the principal may have received help, support, assistance etc, from other persons.

Although, the others persons might not have participated in the actual commission of the crime, the party might have played a vital role in ensuring the successful completion of the crime.

In the cases of National Coal Board v Gamble the court held that he who supplies another person with the instrument for a crime or anything essential to its commission aids the commission of it. However there must be proof of a positive act of assistance voluntarily done with full knowledge of the nature of the crime.

In the current case involving Actress Rosemond, the Photographer (if any) can be said to have been an accessory to the fact, that is a person who may actually be absent at the time of the commission of the crime but have provided the necessary support for the commission of same.

The absence of the Photographer (if any) cannot exculpate him from liability and should be tried for aiding (by way of voluntarily providing the convict with the document for upload) and Abetment of Publication of Obscene material under Act 29.