Four members of the governing board of the Ghana Rugby Football Union (GRFU) were sentenced to 21 days in jail each for contempt of court on Thursday, May 30.

The High Court (General Jurisdiction 2), presided over by Justice Forson Agyapong Baah, handed down the custodial sentences after rejecting requests for non-custodial sentences for the offenders.

The conviction stems from a case titled “The Republic vs James Nunoo Mensah and others ex-parte, Herbert Mensah.”

The four individuals were incarcerated to uphold the dignity and authority of the court, as stated by the judge.

Among those sentenced are Abdul Aziz Issah, President of the Greater Accra Rugby Association and board member; James Nunoo Mensah, former Vice President of Ghana Rugby; Michael Ako Wilson, another board member; and Bismark Amponsah, General Secretary of the GRFU.

The complainant, Herbert Mensah, represented by his lawyer Dominic Brenya of Sam Okudzeto & Associates, filed a contempt case against eight defendants, including the four who were imprisoned, after they disregarded an interlocutory injunction order from the High Court. This order restrained them from conducting meetings, elections, or making defamatory publications in the name of GRFU.

While three other defendants, who are employees of the Ghana Olympic Committee, were acquitted and discharged, the case against the 8th defendant was discontinued.

The incarcerated individuals are among members of the Ghana Rugby community who recently organized an elective congress in December 2023 to appoint new board members.

In 2021, these four individuals were also part of a group that held a special general meeting (SGM) where they claimed to have dismissed Herbert Mensah, the former President of Ghana Rugby, and purported to act as the new board members.

Consequently, Herbert Mensah initiated legal proceedings at the High Court General Jurisdiction 2 in 2021, seeking to invalidate their declarations. This main case is still pending in court.

The judge, in his verdict, highlighted that the defendants’ organization of meetings, elections, and issuance of public notices despite the court’s injunction constituted a deliberate disregard for the court’s authority.

“The law of contempt exists because of individuals like you,” declared the judge, emphasizing, “You employed tactics that undermined the authority of this honorable court and the administration of justice, despite being aware that your actions contravened the injunction against you.” The judge cautioned the public against disregarding court orders.