122. The Court recalls that the essence of the presumption of innocence is for an accused person to be considered innocent throughout all the phases of the trial until the delivery of judgment.18 123. The presumption of innocence espouses that the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt rests on the prosecution and any doubt should benefit the accused. In this regard, in procedures such as an application for bail, the presumption of innocence favours the granting of bail as a general rule while denial of bail should be the exception. 124. The Court observes that the presumption of innocence requires procedural guarantees including the right against self-incrimination and premature expressions by the trial court or other officials of the guilt of the accused person.19 125. The Court notes the decision of Supreme Court of Ghana, that, …[t]he grant of bail is one of the tools available to the court to ensure that a suspect or an accused, as the case may be, is guaranteed his innocence until the court has found him guilty. The presumption of innocence embodies freedom from arbitrary detention and also serves as a safeguard against punishment before conviction…20 126. The Court also notes the Respondent State’s argument that the aim of the limitation under Section 148(5) of the CPA is to safeguard security, health, public interest and rights and freedoms of innocent persons. 127. The Court does not dispute the objectives of the enactment of Section 148(5)(b) and (c) of the CPA as submitted by the Respondent State. However, the Court notes that the risk of absconding bail should not be based solely on the severity of the offence or a previous sentence. The 18 Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza v. Republic of Rwanda (merits) (24 November 2017), 2 AfCLR 165, § 83. ECtHR Allenet de Ribemont v. France, Judgment, Merits and Just Satisfaction, App No 15175/89, A/308, (1995) 20 EHRR 557. 20 Supra, note 30. 19 28