Re Kuffuor, 2025 CanLII 144705

Ontario Review Board

Re: Nana Kow Addo Kuffuor

ORB File No: 8607

Hearing held on: Wednesday, December 3, 2025

Place of Hearing: Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre

Pursuant to: Section 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Weinstein

Members: Dr. R. Kunjukrishnan

Dr. S. Prat Mr. D. Sandor

Mr. A. Bernardo

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Nana Kow Addo Kuffuor

Counsel: Unrepresented

Amicus Curiae Mr. B. Del Greco

Person in charge of hospital: Representative: Dr. J. Gojer

Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. E. Davies

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated December 31, 2025)

Introduction

1. On October 15, 2025, Mr. Nana Kow Addo Kuffuor, was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder, on charges of harassment by threatening conduct to other person, harass by means of repeated telecommunications, and public mischief/false report, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (“Criminal Code”). That finding was based on an assessment by, and related report of, Dr. J. Gojer, dated February 20, 2025.

2. The Court did not make a Disposition pursuant to a Disposition Hearing Outcome, and Mr. Kuffuor was released with restrictions. The court ordered, pursuant to s. 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code, that Mr. Kuffuor appear before the Ontario Review Board (“the Board”) for an initial Disposition.

3. On December 3, 2025, the Board convened a hearing at the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group (“Royal Ottawa”) to make an initial Disposition.

4. Mr. Kuffuor was present at the hearing and wished to represent himself.

5. Mr. Biagio Del Greco appeared as Amicus.

6. A Hospital Report, dated November 14, 2025 (the "Hospital Report"), was entered as Exhibit 1.

7. Numerous other documents forwarded to the ORB by Mr. Kuffour were collectively marked as Exhibit 2. During the hearing, an email from Premier Doug Ford dated June 14, 2023, and a letter from Dr. Lock were marked as Exhibits 3 and 4, respectively.

8. Mr. Kuffuor was previously found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on June 5, 2020. The index offences involved multiple threats to political figures and police. Mr. Kuffuor received an Absolute Discharge for these offences on August 31, 2022.

9. The issues at this hearing were whether Mr. Kuffuor is a significant threat to public safety, as defined in s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code, and, if so, what is the necessary and appropriate Disposition in the circumstances, bearing in mind the factors enunciated in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

10. For the reasons set out below and based on the expert evidence and opinions before us, the Board found that Mr. Kuffuor presents a significant threat to the safety of the public. The Board further concluded that his risk may properly be managed with a Detention Order at Royal Ottawa, on the terms and conditions set out in our formal Disposition. This Disposition will provide Mr. Kuffuor the privilege to reside in the community, in accommodation approved by the person in charge. While living in the community, Mr. Kuffuor will be required to report to the Royal Ottawa not less than once every four weeks. In addition to the other terms set out in our formal Disposition, the Board required that Mr. Kuffuor have no contact with Ms. Ruth Armstrong. The Board found that the above is the necessary and appropriate Disposition in the circumstances.

Current Psychiatric Diagnoses:

1. Schizophrenia

2. Rule out Schizoaffective Disorder

3. Cannabis Use Disorder – To be verified

Index Offences

11. The circumstances giving rise to the Index Offences are set out in detail in the Hospital Report. They are summarized as follows:

Public mischief

On January 15, 2024, a witness received a voicemail at the Media General Inquiry line at the Ministry of the Attorney General. Mr. Kuffuor identified himself in the voicemail, provided his phone number and referenced a newspaper article.

The voicemail was approximately 4 minutes long. In it, Mr. Kuffuor referenced Sergeant Ruth Armstrong of the Ottawa Police Service, stating that Armstrong “is using her team, and entire family tree, for murders.”

On October 10, 2023, Mr. Kuffuor submitted an online report alleging that he is the victim of terrorism and racism by Sergeant Ruth Armstrong. In this report, he submitted more than 1000 pages of attachments. He continued to add to it until at least February 12, 2025.

Mr. Kuffuor has displayed a fixation on Sergeant Armstrong since a brief interaction in 2014. Over several years, Mr. Kuffuor has repeatedly alleged harassment, assault, and attempted murder by Ottawa Police, specifically naming Sergeant Ruth Armstrong.

Mr. Kuffuor has a pattern of persistent allegations against Sergeant Armstrong, spanning from 2015 to 2024. Independent investigations found no merit or substance to these complaints. Mr. Kuffuor’s complaints often involved claims of unconventional weapons, harassment, and murder. These complaints escalated to the point of threatening language in a 2024 voicemail.

Psychiatric History

12. Mr. Kuffuor’s psychiatric history is outlined in the Hospital Report. The following extracted paragraphs are relevant to this hearing:

“He has suffered from depression and anxiety following the assault in 2004. He has been treated with Wellbutrin and he does not take the drug.

He has been admitted to the Ottawa Hospital on a form 1 several times and was taken there by the police on a section 17 of the MHA by the police. He was told he was delusional and given antipsychotic medication against his will on many occasions. He said that it had no effect on him.

Mr. Kuffuor was under the ORB in 2019 but did not want to talk about it. ORB reports indicate that:

Mr. Kuffuor has a complex procedural history. He first came under forensics in May 2019 for a Fitness assessment at OCDC by Dr. Braithwaite. He was felt to be fit and ordered to undergo an NCR assessment as an outpatient. When he presented for his NCR assessment, Dr. Mathias felt he had deteriorated and no longer fit. He was then admitted at the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre (ROMHC) on June 26, 2019 pursuant to a treatment order. At the end of the 60-days, he remained unfit September 9, 2019 and came under the ORB while remaining in hospital being placed on a detention order by the ORB on October 22, 2019. By December 2019, he was fit and returned to court February 7, 2020 ordered to undergo a 30-day NCR assessment again as an outpatient, starting this while in hospital and after discharge on February 19, 2020. The court found him NCR on March 9, 2020.

Mr. Kuffuor received an absolute discharge on the 31st of August 2022.”

Progress since Finding of Not Criminally Responsible due to Mental Disorder

13. Mr. Kuffuor’s progress since his finding of not criminally responsible is outlined in the Hospital Report. The following extracted paragraphs are relevant to this hearing:

“Since a finding of NCRMD, Mr. Kuffour has continued to send numerous communications to the hospital about his maltreatment by various individuals, the suffering he experiences and that accusations about the police. I am unclear if he has continued to communicate with other government agencies.

Mr. Kuffour met with me once on the 27th of October 2025 since his finding of NCRMD. He was unsettled, accusatory, blamed various people for his problems, lamented that he was suffering and could not be adequately assessed. He continued to remain delusional about being influenced by radiation and being burnt and scarred. He also was threatening that he would be reporting me to the authorities for making false claims about him and that I had been discredited. He went on about Doug Ford got a letter from him and thanked him. He also added that he did not have Schizophrenia. He added that he has an appeal and will not take any treatment. He denied any thoughts of wanting to harm others or himself.

No psychiatric treatment at this time.

Capacity to Consent to Treatment

In the absence of insight and an inability to discuss role of treatment in bringing about a resolution of his symptoms, he is incapable of consenting to treatment.”

Position of the Parties

14. Dr. Gojer, as the assessing psychiatrist and representative of the Hospital, advised that the Hospital was recommending a Detention Order, with the privileges set out on pages 47 and 48 of the Hospital Report, including the ability to live in accommodation approved by the person in charge. When living in the community, he is to report not less than once every four weeks. The Hospital added the recommendation that Mr. Kuffuor should not have access to the internet while being detained in hospital, without the prior approval of the person in charge or his or her designate.

15. Counsel for the Attorney-General joined the Hospital in its recommendations.

16. Mr. Kuffuor advised that he should not have “been charged and found guilty” and requested an Absolute Discharge.

Evidence at the Hearing:

17. The Board had available to it the evidence and documents forming the Record, the Exhibits, and oral evidence from Dr. Gojer, Ms. Kate Cunning and Mr. Kuffuor.

Testimony of Dr. Gojer

18. Dr. Gojer co-authored the hospital report, and he testified as follows:

a) Mr. Kuffuor continues to call the hospital on a regular basis.

b) Mr. Kuffuor has been accusing him of committing murder.

c) The risk that Mr. Kuffuor represents to the safety of the public is of a psychological, not a physical nature. This risk is of a high enough level of psychological harm to result in criminal charges, as they were for the Index Offences.

d) Mr. Kuffuor’s delusions extend beyond the police officer, with whom he has been ordered to have no contact, to other people around him.

e) Mr. Kuffuor’s behaviour is being driven by his central delusion of persecution.

f) These delusions are also associated with multiple physical symptoms, which are likely hallucinatory experiences.

g) Mr. Kuffuor has been diagnosed with Schizophrenia, which is unlikely to improve without treatment with appropriate medications.

h) Mr. Kuffuor was previously subject to the Board and received an Absolute Discharge in August 2022. Within a month of receiving this Discharge, he discontinued his recommended treatment and was non-adherent to his medication, shortly thereafter. He was charged again with the offences which brought him before this Board.

i) Without treatment, Mr. Kuffuor represents a real risk to the safety of the public. A formal assessment of Mr. Kuffuor’s capacity to consent to treatment needs to take place in the Hospital, which is one of the reasons that a detention order has been requested.

j) Mr. Kuffuor has a history of responding well to medication when he adheres to his regimen, which he has done while previously detained in the hospital.

k) With medication adherence and optimization, Mr. Kuffuor should be able to live in the community in the coming reporting year.

19. In response to questions from counsel for the Attorney General, Dr. Gojer testified:

a) Since being found not criminally responsible, Mr. Kuffuor has not participated in any treatment whether pharmacological, counselling or therapeutic.

b) He does not believe Mr. Kuffuor is currently on any anti-psychotic medication.

20. In response to questions from the panel, Dr. Gojer testified:

a) The risk to public safety described in oral evidence, and in the Hospital Report, is real, not speculative. This risk is that Mr. Kuffuor would engage in behaviour similar to his conduct during the Index Offences.

b) Mr. Kuffuor continues to engage in the same harassing communications, with both his office and the Crown’s office.

Testimony of Kate Cunning

21. Ms. Cunning is a Court Systems Navigator with the Canadian Mental Health Association (“CMHA”). She was called on behalf of Mr. Kuffuor. She testified as follows:

a) Mr. Kuffuor is required to meet with her pursuant to his judicial release, on a regular basis. Mr. Kuffuor is following the recommendations of the Court, and she has had no complaints about her interactions with him.

b) As a general rule, she does not worry about receiving emails from those suffering from schizophrenia; however, whether those emails would cause her fear would depend on their content.

Testimony of Mr. Kuffuor

22. Mr. Kuffuor testified on his behalf, as follows:

a) He is a homeowner and has a stable residence.

b) He went through all the documents he had submitted that were marked as Exhibits 2-4.

c) Dr. Gojer claims against him, to which Dr. Gojer testified in court, are false and not based on all the documents in Exhibit 2. Mr. Kuffuor gave us a copy of his email of Mr. Ford and two other individuals.

d) He has not committed any crimes, as he has a civic duty to report the crimes of others. These crimes include his allegations that officers murdered his family.

23. No other evidence was called.

Analysis and Conclusions:

24. Having heard and considered the entirety of the evidence as well as the submissions from the parties, the Board finds that Mr. Kuffuor represents a significant threat to the safety of the public.

25. In Winko, the Supreme Court outlined that, in coming to the conclusion on the issue of significant risk, a Review Board should closely examine a range of evidence, including: the circumstances of the original offence; the past and expected course of the accused’s treatment; the present state of the NCR accused’s medical condition; the NCR accused’s own plans for the future; the support existing for the NCR accused in the community; and most importantly, the recommendations provided by experts who examined the NCR accused. In coming to our conclusion in this matter, the Board relies on the uncontroverted expert evidence of Dr. Gojer, in addition to the documentary evidence before us.

26. Mr. Kuffuor is currently non-adherent to his medication and has a history of non-adherence.

27. Dr. Gojer’s uncontroverted evidence is that Mr. Kuffuor represents a significant risk of committing a serious criminal act causing psychological harm. This risk is not speculative.

28. The Board has no difficulty in concluding that Mr. Kuffuor satisfies the test set out in Marmolejo (Re), 2021 ONCA 130, in which Justice Tulloch reviewed the relevant test at paragraph 37:

“The threshold for significant risk is "onerous": Carrick (Re) (2015), 128 O.R. (3d) 209, [2015] O.J. No. 6524, 2015 ONCA 866, at para. 17. A significant threat to the safety of the public means a foreseeable and substantial risk of physical or psychological [page195] harm to members of the public: R. v. Ferguson, [2010] O.J. No. 5138, 2010 ONCA 810, at para. 8. The conduct must be of a serious criminal nature: Ferguson, at para. 8. A very small risk of grave harm will not suffice, nor will a high risk of trivial harm: Ferguson, at para. 8. The threat must be more than speculative in nature; it must be supported by evidence: Winko, at p. 665 S.C.R.; Pellett (Re) (2017), 139 O.R. (3d) 651, [2017] O.J. No. 5025, 2017 ONCA 753, at para. 21.”

29. Dr. Gojer’s evidence is that Mr. Kuffuor needs to be readmitted to the Hospital on a Detention Order, to assess his capacity to consent to treatment and to restart him on an appropriate medication regimen to treat his Schizophrenia. Mr. Kuffuor continues to send harassing emails and communications to the victim of the Index Offence, as well as to Dr. Gojer and to the Crown’s office. It is for this reason the Board agrees with the clause prohibiting access to the Internet without the prior approval of the person in charge. Until such time as he is optimally treated and adherent to his medication regimen, Mr. Kuffuor would continue to engage in his harassment of others, if he were released into the community, whether on a Conditional, or an Absolute, Discharge.

30. Mr. Kuffuor is currently untreated. In the past, he responded well to treatment, and an admission to hospital is currently the only method of getting him the appropriate treatment.

31. In particular, the Board relies on the Prognosis and Risk set out in the Hospital Report:

Mr. Kuffour has no insight into his illness. Notwithstanding his finding of NCRMD and a release order with restrictions, he continues to send communications that interfere with the functioning of the hospital and appears to be interfering with the functioning of the work at the Crown’s office. This interference has to be understood in terms of quantity and quality of the communications. It is very clear that the communications are from a person who is suffering from the effects of delusions and is being tormented by his experiences. His harm to others appears to be psychological and not physical. His history is not one of antisociality or physical aggression. His delusional ideation dates back to events in 2014. He has been under the jurisdiction of the ORB in the past and with treatment he has settled well and had a near full recovery with stable management in the community but later discontinued treatment and follow up. The ability to manage Mr. Kuffour under the Mental Health Act is weak as it is less likely that he will be detained in a general hospital for any extended period of time to be treated. His harm to the public in general is not substantial or of a physical degree. He is likely to be released by a Consent and Capacity Board upon appeal. However, given the relentless nature of his behavior that is secondary to delusional and psychotic experiences, without treatment, his criminally harassing behaviors, ongoing contact with people who he believes are harming him are likely to persist and he is a Significant Risk to the Public.

32. In light of the Board’s finding of significant threat, it is charged with shaping a Disposition for the coming year. It is clear from the Hospital Report, and the uncontroverted evidence of Dr. Gojer, that the Hospital needs to approve Mr. Kuffuor’s housing, to monitor his treatment when released. In the event that he is not compliant with treatment or follow-up, such monitoring would allow the treatment team to readmit him before he became a significant risk to public safety.

33. The evidence is quite clear that the Mental Health Act is insufficient to ensure public safety

a) It is a non-forensic system tool.

b) It would not, and cannot, guarantee that Mr. Kuffuor could be held in hospital long enough to receive adequate treatment, should he again experience delusions and psychosis. Therefore, it cannot protect the safety of the public.

c) Mr. Kuffuor’s lack of insight means he would not return to the hospital voluntarily nor stay in the hospital.

d) It sets different thresholds for risk on admission to hospital, and for ongoing hospital detention, than Part XX.I of the Criminal Code, which is explicit that public safety is a paramount consideration.

e) It is not responsive to issues of psychological, rather than physical, harm.

f) The other means of returning him to hospital as set out in Valdez (Re) 2018 ONCA 657 and Ramos (Re) 2025 ONCA 820 could not be used in a timely manner as these offences and behaviours are happening so frequently and constantly that any order could not be done in a sufficiently timely manner to prevent the psychological harm that occurred.

34. We also note that this is Mr. Kufuor’s second appearance before the Board, for essentially the same harassing behaviours.

35. In consideration of all the evidence, submissions of the parties and criteria set forth in s. 672.54, the paramount consideration being the safety of the public, in addition to the mental condition of Mr. Kuffuor, his reintegration into society and his other needs, the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a Detention Order, upon the terms set out in our formal Disposition.

DATED this 31st day of December 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.

Mr. J. Weinstein

Alternate Chairperson

__________________

Office of the Registrar

Ontario Review Board