Private legal practitioner Martin Kpebu has lauded the Attorney-General for his decision to appeal the sentencing handed out to Chinese galamsey kingpin, Aisha Huang.

The Chinese national was sentenced to four and a half years in prison in addition to a fine of GH₵48,000 by an Accra High Court on Monday, December 4, 2023.

The verdict has raised concerns among many stakeholders and citizens who consider it lenient.

Amongst them are Inusah Fuseini and Professor Frimpong Boateng, who have questioned why Aisha Huang was tried under the old mining Act instead of the amended Act.

Following the concerns, the AG, Godfred Dame issued a statement on Tuesday, December 5, declaring his intention to appeal the ruling to demand stiffer sanctions.

According to Mr Kpebu, the AG’s decision will further strengthen the confidence of the citizenry in the constitution.

• Read also: Aisha Huang verdict shows we’re not serious with ‘galamsey’ fight – Inusah Fuseini

“It's good that the Attorney General is going on appeal, it will strengthen our jurisprudence so that is good. Because let's not forget that justice emanates from the people so where there is a groundswell of disappointment with the sentence and citizens are asking that why can’t we use the new law, it's good to test the law,” he said on JoyFM’s Top Story.

The legal practitioner said he was one of the people who had tested a few laws in the Supreme Court, although many people had told him that he wouldn’t win.

• Read also: AG to appeal Aisha Huang’s sentencing for stiffer punishment

“There is no harm in trying, so it is good the Attorney General is saying that he is going to go on appeal. That is good. Let’s test the law,” he added.

In the same statement by the AG, it cautioned the public to desist from comments that do not only jeopardaise the efficient administration of justice but also undermine the fight against illegal mining.

Read also: I wish I had the right to impose stiffer punishment on you – Judge to Aisha Huang

But Mr Kpebu completely disagreed with that aspect of the statement.

According to him, allowing citizens to talk when they disagree with certain decisions serves democracy better.

"Justice emanates from the people, so sometimes you can have a clear law but where it does not sit well with the citizens, out of the noise the citizens make, we are able to fashion a new law. So, this one it is good,” he added.

Aisha Huang was prosecuted for crimes committed in 2015 and 2017 – Deputy A-G

A Deputy Attorney General, Alfred Tuah-Yeboah, had already clarified the reasons behind the relatively lenient prison term and fine imposed on Aisha Huang. According to him, Miss Huang was prosecuted for her involvement in illegal mining operations between 2015 and 2017, by which time the amended law had not been passed.

He emphasised that there was no evidence of her engagement in illegal mining after her return to Ghana in 2022, following her initial deportation in 2018.

"When we arrested her last year [2022], there was no evidence that when she came back to Ghana, she committed illegal mining offenses. We probed into it and we didn’t find any evidence. If there had been, it would have been another matter," he said.

Responding to questions as to why the new law and its punishment were not utilized in sentencing Miss Huang, the Deputy Attorney General clarified that the judge had applied the appropriate sentencing guidelines.

He noted that since the Chinese national committed the crimes under the old law, the judge adhered to the maximum punishment stipulated by the previous legislation.

"If you have a new law that has reduced the punishment under the old law, use it. But if the old law is lesser than the new law, use the old law; that is the law," Tuah-Yeboah explained.

He expressed the AG office's desire for a harsher sentence, citing the minimum sentencing guidelines for foreign nationals, but reiterated that the judge had followed constitutional provisions and the interpretation act.

It is thus unclear why the same A-G's office now says it is going to file an appeal against the ruling.