Child Rights International Acted Right

The New Publisher is uncomfortable with the growing insults directed at Mr. Bright Appiah, Executive Director of Child Rights International, for being the complainant in the recent court case in which popular entertainer, Rosemond Brown mostly known as Akuapem Poloo, got convicted to serve some 90 days in jail.

Akuapem Poloo was convicted based on her own plea of being guilty to one count of publication of obscene material and two counts of engaging in domestic violence. Her woes started in June last year after she posted on Instagram, her nude picture together with her son, to celebrate his seventh birthday.

The said photo went viral, generated a public uproar and mass condemnation including calls on institutions of state to take her on.

There were several calls on Child Rights International to take up the case in defence of the 7-year-old child, and the organization eventually petitioned the Ghana Police Service to look into the case and ensure the dignity of the child is protected.

The Police, after investigation, saw the need to take the matter to a court of competetent jurisdiction and Akuapem Poloo, during the trial, was given a fair hearing with her full right to counsel and all the constitution describes as her legal rights.

The court, in giving the ruling, stayed within what the law describes.

Indeed expert opinion from legal brains on the ruling have suggested that the Judge, Christina Cann, exercised leniency and that the convict could have been given up to two years instead of the 90 days.

Then the noise started.

Talkers of both sense and nonsense all burst out expressing their opinion aloud.

Persons with a deficit knowledge in legal matters even had the audacity to insult he judge, slam the ruling and describe Mr. Bright Appiah with words, The New Publisher would not want repeated.

For Heaven’s sake, the   mission of Child Rights International is to promote and protect the inherent dignity of every child, to draw attention to the fundamental needs of children, and to provide assistance to help children develop to their full potential.

It is a completely not-for-profit and non-governmental organization that is dedicated to the vision of a society wherein children are given the opportunity to find their identity, realize their worth and develop to their full potential in a safe and supportive environment.

The organization was only doing its job by petitioning the enforcement agencies to take up the matter.

Child Rights International is neither the court nor the judge. The organization did not write the laws used in court during the trial of Akuapem Poloo, nor prescribed the punishment slapped on her.

If Child Rights International had erred, the court would have thrown the case out.

Where then is the sense and logic in heaping insults on the pro-children rights organization for doing its job?

As a society, we need to allow the laws to work. We need to learn how to disagree with a ruling without sounding insulting or rude.

We simply need to start thinking…. And of course, thinking right.