Friday, July 31, 2009

Landlord jailed 4 years • For threatening tenant

Friday, July 31, 2009 (Page 3)

A LANDLORD who went berserk and attempted to visit mayhem on his tenant was yesterday sentenced to four years’ imprisonment with hard labour by an Accra circuit court.
Harry Agyekum got infuriated when his tenant attempted to negotiate with an electrician to re-connect power to her room after power had been disconnected for months as a result of the non-payment of electricity bills by the landlord and other tenants in the house.
Around 2 p.m. on April 30, 2008, the convict, in the full glare of other witnesses, used unprintable words on Ms Grace Joyce Arko Thompson, who had then been locked up in her room for safety, smashed her windows with his bare hands and a kitchen stool in a bid to enter her room to kill her.
He was found guilty on two counts of threat of death and being on premise for unlawful purpose and sentenced to four years and 12 months on each count, respectively.
The sentences are to run concurrently.
The facts of the case were that on March 28, 2008, the complainant approached Harry to discuss the possible contribution towards the reconnection of power to the convict’s compound but the convict did not take kindly to her suggestion and began casting aspersions at her.
According to the prosecution, around 2 p.m. on April 30, 2008, another tenant contacted an electrician for the reconnection of power to his (tenant’s) room. The complainant approached the electrician who was then on the convict’s compound and expressed similar interest.
Some few minutes later, Harry drove into the compound in his car and, on seeing the complainant interacting with the electrician, got infuriated and engaged in verbal exchanges with Ms Thompson.
He then threatened to break her neck but the electrician intervened, pushed the complainant into her room and locked her up to prevent the convict from harming her.
That notwithstanding, Harry smashed the complainant’s glass windows, worth GH¢140, with his bare hands and a kitchen stool in his bid to gain access to her room for the kill. In the process, he injured his arm.
Not perturbed by the blood oozing out of his injured arm, Harry tried to gain access into the complainant’s room but onlookers rushed onto the scene and prevented him from entering the room.
The complainant managed to call her father on the phone while Harry made frantic efforts to gain access to her room.
The complainant’s father reported the matter to the police, who went to the scene and rescued the complainant.
The police took photographs of the scene and subsequently arrested the convict.

Thursday, July 30, 2009

Fake doctor jailed

Thursday, Julu 30, 2009 (Page 31)

THE Accra Circuit Court yesterday sentenced a fake medical doctor to 10 months imprisonment.
Joseph Kenny Agodoa was also ordered to pay GH¢2,400 fine after he was convicted on three counts of obtaining registration by false representation contrary to Section 35 of the Medical and Dental Decree NRCD 91 of 1972, possessing of forged documents and deceit of public officer.
The court, presided over by Mrs Elizabeth Ankomah, also ordered that the name of Agodoa should be expunged from the records of the Medical and Dental Council.
The Council had registered Agodoa as practitioner number 4023 after Agodoa had presented a medical certificate purported to have been issued by the University of Nigeria in 1998.
However, after three months of being posted to the Ho Government Hospital, he exhibited serious deficiency in the medical field and for that matter he was eventually barred from practising.
That notwithstanding, Agodoa deserted his duty post, went into hiding and began private practice.
The facts of the case were that, Agodoa went to the Dental and Medical Council and presented the certificate as a trained medical officer after which he was registered.
He was later posted to the Ho Government Hospital and attached to the Surgical Unit of the hospital.
After three months, he was found to lack knowledge and clinical skills and was, therefore, attached to the Ghana Medical Council School for six months orientation.
Three months into the orientation, the Council realised that Agodoa was deficient in all areas and it was recommended that he be withdrawn while his background was investigated.
The matter got to the attention of the Ministry of Health (MOH) which ordered that Agodoa went back to Ho and be re-assigned to non-medical duties while he undergoes investigation.
The convict, however, refused to report at his duty post and that resulted in the withholding of his registration.
Agodoa managed to go into private practice but the public and other practitioners who were not satisfied with his conduct reported him to the Dental and Medical Council.
Verification carried out by the Medical and Dental Council from the College of Medicine of the University of Nigeria revealed that Agodoa had not had any training from that school as he had earlier claimed.
The Council then referred the matter to the Police for investigation and subsequent prosecution of the convict.

'Magistrate gave me false documents'

Thursday, July 30, 2009 (Page 3)

THE Professor who was allegedly defrauded to the tune of GH¢18,000 by a female magistrate, Anna Jane Ghartey, told the Accra Circuit Court that the magistrate gave him fake documents covering two plots of land he had purchased at a total of GH¢20,000.
Professor Joseph Emmanuel Kwasi Adjaye said one of the indentures covering the plots of land sold to him indicated that the land belonged to the Kpeshie chiefs contrary to earlier claims from Anna that the land belonged to one Auntie Rose.
He also told the court that one of the indentures also contained the name of a deceased person.
Anna was alleged to have conspired with Samuel Aidoo, a building contractor, and Joana Nyarko, a fish monger, to deceive Professor Adjaye into believing that she (Anna) had parcels of land for sale at Adjiringanor, a suburb of Accra, succeeded in collecting a total of GH¢18,000 from him and prepared fake indentures covering two plots of land belonging to a deceased person.
Anna, who has since been discharged from the Bench, has been granted bail in the sum of GH¢30,000 with two sureties by the court, presided over by Mr Mahamadu Iddrisu.
The accused person is also standing trial in the same court for allegedly defrauding a Swiss national, Ms Darcie Slavin, of GH¢47,000 under the guise of providing her with plots of land. She has been granted bail in the sum of GH¢40,000 with two sureties to reappear on August 13, 2009 in that particular case.
Led by Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Mary Agbozo to give his evidence-in-chief, Professor Adjaye, a lecturer of African Studies at the University of Pennsylvania in the United States of America (USA), told the court that he met Anna in December 2006 through his brother, Dr Robert Adjaye, when he (Prof. Adjaye) needed parcels of land to purchase for development.
He said Anna, who was then with the Ghana Prisons Service, showed him parcels of land at Adjiringano and East Legon and later delegated Samuel to show him (Prof. Adjaye) more plots of land.
According to him, he made payments in three instalments to the tune of GH¢20,000 and an additional payment of GH¢5,000 which Anna said the Kpeshie chiefs would use to prepare consent letters, indentures and other documents covering the land.
He explained that Anna issued receipts for all payments he made to her.
He said he never received those consent letters and further told the court that a search he conducted at the Lands Commission proved that the lands Anna sold to him belonged to other people.
Prof. Adjaye told the court that upon realising that he had been duped, he decided to report Anna to the Property Fraud Unit of the Ghana Police Service to retrieve his money.
He said the head of the unit invited him and Anna for the matter to be resolved and at the said meeting it turned out that other persons who had been defrauded by Anna were present.
According to him, he was amazed to find that Samuel had used documents bearing his name to sell the same plot of land sold to him to another developer.
The complainant also told the court that Anna refunded GH¢4,000 as part-payment of moneys she had received from him after he had lodged a complaint with the police.
He is expected to be cross-examined by counsel for Anna on Thursday, July 30, 2009.
According to the facts of the case, in December 2006 Anna and Samuel collected GH¢11,000 from Prof. Adjaye and a further GH¢7,000 from him in August 2007.
According to the prosecution, the accused persons managed to hand over two parcels of land to Prof Adjaye and prepared documents covering the land and handed them over to the complainant.
However, Prof Adjaye was prevented from developing the land by some persons who also claimed ownership over it.
According to the prosecution, Anna replaced the plots in contention and gave Prof Adjaye new plots, which later turned out to have been registered in another person’s name.
In the course of police investigations, it came out that the person whose name was used on the indenture purported to be covering the plots of land sold to Prof Adjaye died on June 24, 2005 at the age of 98.

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

GT sale - Court to rule on legality of suit Oct 12

Wednesday, July 29, 2009 (Page 3 Lead)

THE Commercial Court hearing the litigation on the sale of Ghana Telecom (now Vodafone) will, on October 12, 2009, decide whether or not an agreement executed by the government and ratified by Parliament can be challenged in the High Court.
The plaintiffs in the matter, Professor Agyeman Badu Akosa and five others, who sued the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Ghana Telecommunications Company Limited and the Registrar General over the sale of Ghana Telecom to Vodafone B.V. International, are praying the court to vary the issue set out for trial which bordered on whether or not a party could challenge an agreement ratified by Parliament at the High Court.
The other plaintiffs, who are all members of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), are Mr Michael Kosi Dedey, Dr Nii Moi Thompson, Naa Kordai Assimeh, Ms Rhodaline Imoru Ayarna and Mr Kwame Jantuah.
Arguing the case for the plaintiffs at the court’s sitting in Accra yesterday, Mr Bright Akwetey told the court that after carefully examining issues set out for trial, it appeared the issue in contention was highly prejudicial because it created the impression that the plaintiffs were raising issues of constitutionality.
He said his clients were not challenging the constitutionality of the ratification of the agreement by Parliament.
And that position is founded on the grounds that the plaintiffs filed the suit against the government and Ghana Telecom on August 11, 2008 before Parliament approved the agreement on August 14, 2008.
“The centrepiece of our case is against the provisions in the agreement that was executed on July 3, 2008 by the government,” Mr Akwetey argued.
Opposing his colleague’s application, counsel for Ghana Telecom, Mr Festus Kayi, said the issues being opposed by the plaintiffs were contained in an order by a pre-trial judge at the Commercial Court after parties had failed to reach a settlement.
He said the plaintiffs could, therefore, not seek to vary the order by alleging that the issue on whether or not one could challenge an agreement ratified by Parliament at the High Court was prejudicial.
Counsel also argued that the pleadings by the applicants raised very important constitutional issues to which he would refer the court during the trial.
Mr Kayi also stated that the plaintiffs, having admitted in the amended statement of claim that Parliament had ratified the agreement in question, could not question the execution of the agreement or its provisions without raising a constitutional issue.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice Amadu Tanko, fixed October 12, 2009 as the date for ruling on the matter.
In the substantive suit, the plaintiffs are contending that the Sale and Purchase Agreement entered into among the Government of Ghana, GT and Vodafone for the sale of 70 per cent of GT for $900 million was against the public interest and constituted an abuse of the discretionary powers of the government.
They said they were opposed to the unlawful establishment of the said Enlarged GT Group, as it undermined the sovereignty of the country and endangered the national security of Ghana.
According to them, the decision of the government to transfer the assets, properties, shares, equipment, among others, to Vodafone was obnoxious, unlawful and inimical to the public interest, particularly when no consideration was required to be paid by Vodafone for the stated assets.
The group argued that the three Ministers of State and the managing director of GT who signed the agreement on behalf of the government did not exercise the requisite level of circumspection required of them as public officers in relation to public property.
The plaintiffs are, therefore, seeking reliefs from the court, including a declaration that the agreement entered into by the government was not in accordance with the due process of law and was, therefore, a nullity.
They are also demanding that the court should give an order declaring that the forcible grouping of autonomous state institutions established by law — Voltacom, Fibreco, VRA Fibre Network and VRA Fibre Assets — with GT to form the purported Enlarged GT Group was unlawful and, therefore, void and of no legal effect.
The plaintiffs are further praying for an order of perpetual injunction to restrain the government from disposing of its 70 per cent share of GT to Vodafone or any other foreign company without first exploring avenues for funding and better management in Ghana.

Monday, July 27, 2009

Bawku Central MP loses round two

July 23, 2009 (Page 3)

THE Accra Fast Track High Court yesterday dismissed a motion filed by the Member of Parliament (MP) for Bawku Central, Mr Adamu Daramani, which prayed the court to stay execution of its order asking him to vacate his seat because he holds a dual nationality.
According to the court, the MP had had ample time to file his defence in a suit challenging his dual citizenship, adding that the MP failed to convince the court on why he should be granted leave to file his defence.
In a default judgement dated July 15, 2009, the court had declared that the MP owed allegiance to Britain other than Ghana and for that reason he could not hold a position as MP in Ghana.
In its ruling, the court, presided over by Mr Justice S. K. Asiedu, had held that the MP failed to justify why the court should grant his application.
A cattle farmer, Mr Sumaila Biebel, had filed an application seeking a declaration that the MP should be ordered to vacate his seat because he was a British national and for that matter did not qualify to sit as an MP.
The court held in the judgement that in law, the MP had 14 days to file his defence but he failed to do so after entering appearance and it, therefore, deemed that he did not have a defence to the suit.
An affidavit in support of the MP’s motion for stay of execution indicated that the delay in furnishing a defence had been due partly to certain relevant information he had requested from his solicitor in the UK.
Mr Daramani also deposed that he had a reasonable defence to the plaintiff’s suit and for that matter it was important that the court set aside its order to enable him to provide evidence to challenge the plaintiff’s claims.
However, the plaintiff had argued that the MP had no defence to his claims and that had accounted for the delay in filing his defence.
Meanwhile, the MP is pursuing his application for stay of proceedings pending his original appeal against the refusal of the High Court to set aside the plaintiff’s writ on the grounds of jurisdiction, capacity and contention that the plaintiff’s suit was an electoral petition “dressed as a constitutional enforcement action”.
The Court of Appeal yesterday adjourned the matter indefinitely to enable the MP to obtain the ruling of the High Court, which refused to uphold the MP’s motion praying the court to set aside the plaintiff’s writ of summons.
Mr Daramani has filed another appeal against the High Court’s refusal to set aside its default judgement.

A-G awaits docket on Ex Foreign Minister

July 23, 2009 (Front Page)

THE Attorney-General’s Department is awaiting the docket on the case involving the former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Akwasi Osei-Adjei, who has been charged by the Bureau of National Investigation (BNI) with wilfully causing financial loss to the state.
Reacting to reports on the A-G’s involvement in the case, the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, said her outfit does not charge suspects but rather prosecutes suspects who had been investigated and duly charged by the security agencies.
In the case of Mr Osei-Adjei who had been formally charged by the BNI for his role in the importation of huge quantities of rice valued at $10.26 million, she said the BNI was yet to furnish her outfit with the docket.
In an interview with the Daily Graphic, Mrs Mould-Iddrisu confirmed that the BNI had officially charged Osei-Adjei and therefore he would be prosecuted if the docket on him was forwarded to her outfit.
The BNI has since granted Mr Osei-Adjei self recognisance bail in the sum of GH¢500,000.
The counsel for Mr Osei-Adjei, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, also confirmed to the Daily Graphic that his client was invited to the BNI offices yesterday and charged with the offence.
He said his client was innocent of charges preferred against him and would prove that in due course.
Meanwhile, a civil suit filed by Osei-Adjei against the Director of the BNI and the Attorney-General for violating his fundamental human rights will be heard on Friday, July 24, 2009.
According to Mr Osei-Adjei, the seizure and detention of his passport by officials of the BNI was “flagrantly unlawful and a palpable violation” of his human rights.
He said the BNI, which seized his passport on May 26, 2009 at the BNI offices, had acted “maliciously and in bad faith” and could, therefore, not be trusted to conduct any independent and impartial investigation into the role he played in the importation of rice when he was Minister of Foreign Affairs.
He is, therefore, praying the court to declare that the seizure of his passport was not constitutional and an abuse of his fundamental human rights, as well as a further order directed at the Director of the BNI to release his passport unconditionally.
Mr Osei-Adjei is also seeking an order of prohibition directed at the Attorney-General and the Director of the BNI to restrain them from further curtailment of his right to freedom of movement without a court order.
The A-G's Department has also defended the detention of Mr Akwasi Osei-Adjei's passport on the grounds that the BNI was mandated, under the Security and Intelligence Agencies Act (Act 526), to investigate him.
According to the A-G's Department, Mr Osei-Adjei was likely to abscond if he had access to his passport.
It further stated that Mr Osei-Adjei’s suit was aimed at detracting the BNI from investigating his unlawful importation of rice, as well as inflating the price of the rice.

Private lotto operators lose case

Thursday, July 23, 2009 (Page 55)

THE Supreme Court yesterday quashed an order by the Accra Fast Track High Court which gave the nod to private lotto operators to operate in the country.
According to the Supreme Court, the Fast Track High Court exceeded its authority in allowing the Ghana Lotto Operators Association (GLOA) and six others to operate private lotto in the country.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice William Atuguba, in a unanimous decision, said the lower court did not have the jurisdiction to authorise GLOA and the six others to continue with their private lotto operations pending the determination of an appeal against an earlier ruling that had outlawed private lotto.
The other members of the panel were Professor Justice S.K. Date-Bah, Mr Justice Julius Ansah, Mr Justice Annin Yeboah and Mr Justice P. Baffoe-Bonnie.
On April 1, 2009, the Accra Fast Track High Court gave the nod to private lotto operators to function until the Court of Appeal determined otherwise.
In staying its earlier decision that outlawed private lotto in the country, the court stated that GLOA and the six others had raised issues that needed to be heard by the Court of Appeal on their merit and, accordingly, restrained the NLA from interfering with the property rights of the applicants, adding that the court agreed with the applicants’ assertion that there were issues to be looked into and, therefore, it was only fair to maintain the status quo of the applicants.
Not satisfied with the court’s decision, the NLA went to the Supreme Court to invoke its supervisory jurisdiction for an order of certiorari to quash the decision of the Fast Track High Court.
The Supreme Court, at its sitting in Accra yesterday, upheld the NLA’s application and, accordingly, quashed the High Court’s ruling on the grounds that the court exceeded its authority in displacing the Lotto Act (NLA) Act 2006, Act 722 which was passed by Parliament to outlaw private lotto in the country.
The effect of the ruling is that the outlaw of private lotto in the country by Act 722 has been bolstered.
The Director of Finance and Administration of the NLA, Mr Charles Mensah, described the court’s decision as a “win for the industry” because, according to him, the ruling would bring sanity into the lotto industry.
He said there was only one reference point for lottery, as pertained in other jurisdictions, adding that 17 companies had so far been licensed by the NLA to market and distribute products on behalf of the NLA, in line with provisions under Act 722.
Reacting to the court’s ruling, the General Secretary of GLOA, Mr Seth Amoani, said the court’s ruling had rendered more than 500,000 Ghanaians jobless.
He said “we are now at the mercy of the state” and further urged the government to amend the Lotto Act to make room for private participation in lotto.

Cop denies conspiracy to rob businessman

Tuesday, July 21, 2009 (Page 31)

ONE of the policemen who are standing trial with 11 others for allegedly robbing a businessman on Friday, July 17, 2009 informed the Circuit Court hearing the case that his evidence incriminating one of his alleged accomplices was not an afterthought.
Lance Corporal Karimu Muntari had told the court in his evidence-in-chief that one of his alleged accomplices, Chief Inspector Thomas Adu, had struggled with the businessman, Mr Kwaku Duah, on the day of the alleged robbery, although Adu had earlier told the court that he (Adu) had not struggled with the businessman.
The accused person also informed the court that Adu arrived at the hotel where the incident took place in the company of Sergeant John Agyapong and Corporal Lawrence Dennis Quansah, both accused persons, and a soldier who is on the run.
Adu had earlier told the court that he (Adu) had arrived at the hotel in the company of Agyapong and Quansah but Muntari insisted that a soldier who the businessman had told the court had assaulted him on February 2, 2009 was also part of Adu’s entourage which arrived at the hotel in a Mercedes Benz saloon car.
Muntari is standing trial with DSP Kwapong of the Rapid Response Unit of the Ghana Police Service, Adu, Agyapong, Constable Benjamin Blejumah, Aams Amanor, Kwasi Tawiah, Peter Kwame Gyasi and Bismark Ampofo for allegedly playing various roles in the attack and robbery of Mr Duah.
The accused persons have all pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and robbery and have been refused bail. Acheampong, Jeffrey Kwame Attah, aka Kay, and three others whose names have not been provided are on the run.
The accused persons were alleged to have robbed Mr Duah, who lives in Europe, at a hotel in Accra and taken away $53,000, €1,000 and GH¢2,000. They were also alleged to have robbed the victim of a black bag containing two compact disc Walkman players, a set of keys, a digital camera, a cheque book and other items, all valued at $4,000.
Answering questions under cross-examination from counsel for Adu, Mr Dominic Kwame Nyamkon-Tetteh, Muntari denied lying to the court and further stated that he did not know Adu prior to the incident.
He told the court that he saw Adu and Acheampong struggling with Mr Duah and later Mr Duah was put in the Mercedes Benz in handcuffs.
Muntari informed the court during cross-examination from a Chief State Attorney, Ms Cynthia Lamptey, that he had not gone to the hotel to rob Mr Duah and further pointed out that he had not been sent with anybody to incriminate Mr Duah.
Answering questions under cross-examination from counsel for Kwapong, Mr Ellis Owusu Fordjour, the accused person told the court that there were other senior officers, apart from Kwapong, at the Rapid Deployment Force (RDF) Unit, adding that it was Kwapong who gave him (Muntari), Acheampong and Blejumah a vehicle to effect an arrest at the hotel.
He told the court during cross-examination from lawyers for Aams, Tawiah, Gyasi and Ampofo that he did not know those persons before the incident.
Agyapong and Quansah, whose lawyers were not in court, said they had no questions for the accused person when the court requested them to cross-examine him.
Later, Blejumah told the court that he was at home when Muntari called him and informed him that Kwapong had sent them (Muntari, Blejumah and Acheampong) to effect the arrest of a suspected drug dealer in Tema.
Led by his counsel, Mr Dela Blagogee, to open his defence, the accused person told the court that he joined Muntari, Acheampong and a civilian who was driving the Toyota Corolla at the Airport Roundabout to Tema but on reaching Tema the driver received a call that the suspect was rather in Accra.
He said at the hotel, he saw the soldier struggling with Mr Duah, who was later handcuffed and put in the vehicle which was also occupied by Adu, Agyapong, the soldier and Acheampong.
According to Blejumah, the civilian who drove them to the hotel abandoned the car and joined a red pick-up which was being driven by Jeffrey and for that matter Muntari instructed him (Blejumah) to drive the Toyota Corolla.
He said Muntari asked him to follow the vehicle which carried Mr Duah to enable them to report back to Kwapong, adding that the pick-up and the Mercedes Benz went to the Tesano Police Depot.
Blejumah said he saw Kwapong coming towards the officers mess so he quickly got down from the Toyota Corolla and paid compliments. (Kwapong had earlier told the court in his evidence-in-chief that he did not send Muntari and Blejumah to effect the arrest of Mr Duah.)
The accused person told the court that he saw Adu taking Mr Duah to Kwapong, adding that he left the Police Depot with Muntari because he was on night duties.
Hearing continues today, July 20, 2009.

Father jailed for incest

July 18, 2009 (Page 34 - MIRROR)

A man who had sex with his 15-year-old daughter has been sentenced to 10 years imprisonment with hard labour by the Accra Circuit Court.
Joseph Pobee, a barber, pleaded guilty to one count of incest and told the court before his sentence that “anytime I see my daughter, she appears like her mother. I undressed her before I realised what I had done.”
The Presiding Judge, Mr C.A. Wilson, said the convict’s act was abominable.
According to Assistant Superintendent of Police, Mr Lawrence Gael, the convict, who was no longer married to the victim’s mother, lived at Dome Pillar Two, a suburb of Accra with the victim and her step mother.
On June 16, 2009, a quarrel ensued between Pobee and his wife (the victim’s step mother) and in the process, his wife left the house, leaving the victim and her father alone.
Pobee invited his daughter to the living room and requested her to hug him which she did.
He later asked her to kiss him but she refused.
Pobee, however, pushed his daughter to the ground and forcibly had sex with her.
The unhappy victim reported her father’s conduct to her relatives at Alajo, a suburb of Accra, and they in turn reported the matter to the police.
The victim was issued a medical form to attend hospital for examinations.

Friday, July 17, 2009

Court adjourns Osei-Adjei's case

Friday, July 17, 2009
HEARING of the suit initiated by a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Akwasi Osei-Adjei, against the Director of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) and the Attorney-General for violating his fundamental human rights has been adjourned to July 24, 2009.
The matter was adjourned because the Deputy Attorney-General, Mr Ebo Barton-Oduro, who had been designated to represent the respondents in court, was indisposed.
A State Attorney, Mr Elikpim Agbemava, produced a medical report indicating that the Deputy Attorney-General was indisposed and accordingly prayed the court to adjourn the matter to July 24, 2009.
However, counsel for Mr Osei-Adjei, Mr Godfred Yeboah-Dame, opposed the application on the grounds that the Attorney-General’s office had enough competent lawyers to represent the respondents in court.
The court, presided over by Mr U.P. Dery, upheld Mr Agbemava’s plea and accordingly adjourned the matter to July 24, 2009.
Mr Dery also indicated that he would hear arguments from both parties on the application on the next adjourned date.
According to Mr Osei-Adjei, the seizure and detention of his passport by officials of the BNI was “flagrantly unlawful and a palpable violation” of his human rights, but the A-G’s Department holds a different view.
He said the BNI, which seized his passport on May 26, 2009 at the BNI offices, had acted “maliciously and in bad faith” and could, therefore, not be trusted to conduct any independent and impartial investigation into the role he played in the importation of rice when he was Minister of Foreign Affairs.
He is, therefore, praying the court to declare that the seizure of his passport was not constitutional and an abuse of his fundamental human rights, as well as a further order directed at the Director of the BNI to release his passport unconditionally.
Mr Osei-Adjei is also seeking an order of prohibition directed at the Attorney-General and the Director of the BNI to restrain them from further curtailment of his right to freedom of movement without a court order.
However, the A-G's Department has defended the detention of Mr Akwasi Osei-Adjei's passport on the grounds that the BNI was mandated, under the Security and Intelligence Agencies Act (Act 526), to investigate Mr Osei-Adjei.
According to the A-G's Department, Mr Osei-Adjei, who was suspected of causing financial loss to the state through the importation of huge quantities of rice, was likely to abscond if he had access to his passport.
It further stated that Mr Osei-Adjei’s suit was aimed at detracting the BNI from investigating his unlawful importation of rice, as well as inflating the price of the rice.
The affidavit in opposition, dated July 8, 2009, said the applicant was being investigated by the state for acts or omissions which had caused huge economic loss to the state.
It said instead of arresting and granting him bail, the BNI decided to invite him to assist in investigations and to restrict his movement while investigations continued.
It further argued that the BNI’s decision to detain the applicant's passport was "perfectly legal and constitutional", adding that it was in accordance with the fundamental human rights provisions in the 1992 Constitution and more particularly under Article 14 (1) (g) of the 1992 Constitution.
Article 14 (1) (g) of the 1992 Constitution states, "A person can be deprived of his personal liberty upon reasonable suspicion of his having committed or about to commit criminal offence under the laws of Ghana."
It further stated that Article 14 (3) of the Internal Security Agencies Act states that the internal security agencies had the right to detain or restrict the movement of the applicant upon reasonable suspicion of his having committed a criminal offence under the laws of Ghana.
It said the BNI was permitted, under the laws of the land, to restrict one's movement to ensure that subjects of criminal investigations, such as Mr Osei-Adjei, appeared before the BNI to continue with proceedings preliminary to trial.

MP for Bawku Central files motion against judgment

Friday, July 17, 2009 (Page 3)

THE Member of Parliament (MP) for Bawku Central, Mr Adamu Daramani, has filed a motion praying the Accra Fast Track High Court to stay execution of its order asking him to vacate his seat because he holds a dual nationality.
In a default judgement on Wednesday, the court declared that the MP owed allegiance to Britain other than Ghana and for that reason he could not hold a position as MP in Ghana.
However, the MP has filed a motion asking the court to set aside its default judgement, stay execution of the judgement as well as grant him leave to file his defence to an application filed by a cattle farmer challenging his eligibility to sit as an MP in Ghana.
The cattle farmer, Mr Sumaila Biebel, filed an application seeking a declaration that the MP should be ordered to vacate his seat because he (MP) was a British national and for that matter he did not qualify to sit as an MP.
The court had held that in law, the MP had 14 days to file his defence but he failed to do so after entering appearance and it, therefore, deemed that the MP did not have a defence to the suit.
An affidavit in support of his motion indicated that "the delay in furnishing a defence is due partly to the fact that certain relevant information I requested from my UK solicitor have not reached my solicitors herein; but I am compelled to seek leave of this honourable court to furnish a defence even without the relevant information to prevent a situation where I will be bound by a judgement which I had no opportunity to contest on its merits."
Mr Daramani also deposed that he had a reasonable defence to the plaintiff’s suit and for that matter it was important the court set aside its order to enable him provide evidence to challenge the plaintiff’s claims.
"The cardinal principles of natural justice is that a man must be heard before he is condemned; which principle is in jeopardy if this honourable court does not exercise its discretion in my favour in granting this application as to enable me file my defence to enable this action be determined on its merits," the affidavit in support of the motion pointed out.
It said it was also important for the court to set aside its judgement "to prevent a situation where the plaintiff/respondent will take advantage of the judgement and order aforementioned and cause irretrievable harm and/or injury to the constituents of Bawku Central and I."
In his statement of defence to the substantive application filed on his behalf by his counsel, Mr Egbert Faibille, the MP denied claims by the plaintiff and stated that he had renounced his British citizenship before signing the nomination form for the 2008 Parliamentary elections and for that matter he did not owe allegiance to any country other than Ghana.
He further argued that the plaintiff's claims sought to challenge the validity of his election as MP adding that "it ought to have been initiated by a Petition and within 21 days of the publication of the 2008 parliamentary election results in the Gazette as provided by law and not by a Writ of Summons; which was in any event filed beyond the 21-day period aforementioned."
Mr Daramani further argued that he was duly certified as qualified to contest the 2008 parliamentary elections by the appropriate authorities in the country and was duly sworn in as an MP in which capacity he acted and for that matter "raises a clear presumption that defendant is a Ghanaian citizen."
He also challenged Mr Biebel to prove that he (MP) was not a citizen of Ghana adding that the plaintiff was not entitled to any claim because plaintiff's action was "incompetent and offensive to law and ought not to be heard at all."

Bawku Central MP to vacate seat

Thursday, July 16, 2009 (Centre Spread)

THE Accra Fast Track High Court yesterday ordered the Member of Parliament (MP) for Bawku Central, Mr Adamu Dramani, to vacate his seat.
It also declared that the MP owed allegiance to Britain other than Ghana and for that reason he could not hold a position as MP in Ghana.
But the MP is astounded at the court’s decision and indicated that he would appeal against the judgement. He also urged his constituents to remain calm while he sought legal redress to the court’s decision.
The court’s order followed a suit filed by a cattle farmer, Mr Sumaila Biebel, who sought a declaration that the MP should be ordered to vacate his seat because he (MP) was a British national and for that matter he did not qualify to sit as an MP.
Delivering its judgement in a motion filed on behalf of the applicant which prayed the court to enter judgement in favour of the applicant in default of defence, the court held that in law the MP had 14 days to file his defence but he failed to do so after entering appearance.
It said it, therefore, deemed that the MP did not have a defence to the suit.
According to the court, it was on its record that Mr Dramani had been served with the motion for judgement in default of defence filed on behalf of the applicant by his counsel.
Touching on an affidavit in opposition to the motion for judgement in default of appearance, which stated among others that the MP had filed an appeal against the court’s earlier dismissal of a motion challenging its jurisdiction, the court held that those were not the issues before it.
It said the issues before it were whether or not Mr Dramani had filed his defence to the plaintiff’s claims on his nationality.
It further held that the plaintiff was entitled to his claims and, accordingly, granted the reliefs sought by him.
Earlier, counsel for the applicant, Dr Raymond Atuguba, had moved the application praying the court to grant his client’s application for entry of judgement in default of defence but Mr Egbert Faibille, who represented Mr Dramani, opposed the application on the grounds that his client had filed an appeal against the court’s earlier rulings.
According to Dr Atuguba, the MP had failed to abide by the High Court rules which stipulated that a person sued had 14 days within which to file a defence and, therefore, prayed the court to grant the application for default judgement.
Challenging the applicant’s motion, Mr Faibille held that his client had filed an appeal against the court’s earlier dismissal of a motion which challenged the constitutionality of the court.
He also stated that his client had filed a motion for stay of proceedings and for that matter the court could not go ahead to grant the application.
However, the court held, among others, that it had not received any order from the Court of Appeal to stay proceedings in the case.
No costs were awarded.

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Bench warrant for judge's arrest

Wednesday, July 15, 2009 (Page 3)

THE Accra Circuit Court yesterday issued a bench warrant for the arrest of a magistrate, Anna Jane Ghartey, who is standing trial for allegedly defrauding a professor to the tune of GH¢18,000.
Anna Ghartey, who was until recently a magistrate at the Juvenile Court in Accra, is currently on interdiction.
She was alleged to have conspired with Samuel Aidoo, a building contractor, to deceive one Professor Joseph Adjaye into believing that she had parcels of land for sale at Adjiringanor, a suburb of Accra, succeeded in collecting a total of GH¢18,000 from him and prepared fake indentures covering two plots of land belonging to a deceased person.
In the course of police investigations, it turned out that the person whose name was on the indenture purported to be covering the plots of land sold to Prof Adjaye died on June 24, 2005 at the age of 98.
Anna Ghartey, however, failed to appear before the court to answer charges of four counts of conspiracy and defrauding by false pretences.
Her alleged accomplice, Samuel, was in court.
The matter was adjourned to Monday, July 20, 2009.
According to the facts of the case, as presented by Assistant Superintendent of Police Ms Mary Agbozo, in December 2006 Anna and Samuel collected GH¢11,000 from Prof Adjaye and a further GH¢7,000 from him in August 2007.
According to the prosecution, the accused persons managed to hand over two parcels of land to Prof Adjaye, who is resident in the United States of America (USA).
They also prepared documents covering the land and handed them over to the complainant.
However, Prof Adjaye was prevented from developing the land by some persons who also claimed ownership over it.
According to the prosecution, Anna replaced the plots in contention and gave Prof Adjaye new plots, which later turned out to be registered in another person’s name.
On realising he had been duped, Prof Adjaye lodged a complaint with the police and while investigations were ongoing Anna promised to refund $30,000, being the expenses incurred by Prof Adjaye as a result of his dealings with her, by July 31, 2008.
The prosecution said the accused person, however, failed to pay the amount and rather gave the complainant a plot of land at Agbogba, a suburb of Accra, and claimed that that plot of land was her personal property which she had used to defray part of her debt.
However, police investigations indicated that the said land also belonged to another person.

Interdicted Chief Director seeks legal redress

July 13, 2009 (Page 25)

THE Chief Director of the Ministry of Youth and Sports, Mr Albert Anthony Ampong, is challenging his interdiction, following investigations into allegations of financial impropriety levelled against Alhaji Muntaka Mohammed Mubarak, the former sector minister.
He is seeking a declaration that an order directed at him to refund $20,000 and a further order that sanctions must be applied against him are unlawful.
Mr Ampong was ordered to proceed on leave on July 7, 2009, following recommendations from the National Security Committee which investigated financial impropriety levelled against Alhaji Mubarak by the Principal Accountant at the Sports Ministry.
In an application for judicial review filed against the Attorney-General and the Head of the Civil Service, Mr Ampong is also seeking a declaration at the High Court that the decision of the Head of Civil Service to implement directives from the President was unlawful.
The applicant is further praying the court to quash the decision to interdict him on the grounds that due process was not followed and therefore it was a violation of the relevant laws and disciplinary regulations of the Civil Service of Ghana.
Mr Ampong is additionally seeking an order prohibiting the respondents from imposing any disciplinary sanctions against him on the basis of the National Security report on investigations into allegations against Alhaji Muntaka Mohammed Mubarak.
He is likewise praying the court to grant an order of mandamus to compel the Head of Civil Service to allow him to resume his normal duties as the Chief Director of the ministry among any other orders the court might deem fit.
According to the applicant, the respondents acted illegally, unreasonably, capriciously, arbitrarily and in an unfair manner.
An affidavit in support of his application, stated that he was only called as a witness at the committee set up to investigate Alhaji Mubarak and not as an accused person.
It said he testified at the committee, although he was refused legal representation, adding that he informed the committee that he had advanced $20,000 to Alhaji Mubarak after the money had been advanced to him by the Principal Accountant of the ministry.
According to the affidavit, he had to date “not been furnished with a copy of the National Security’s report into the allegations levelled against the then minister, even though the President purported to take a disciplinary decision against me and has recommended further disciplinary sanctions against me, on the strength of that report”.
It further stated that the Civil Service Council was the disciplinary authority for all civil servants and disciplinary proceedings in cases of misconduct and unsatisfactory service on the part of civil servants and therefore a civil servant could be disciplined only in accordance with strict adherence to the Civil Service Act and regulations and accepted principles of fairness, natural justice and rule of law.
According to the applicant, he was denied legal representation as well as access to the responses of the then honourable minister to the various allegations, therefore such action violated the Civil Service regulations regarding proper investigations into suspected misconduct of civil servants and also basic standards of procedural fairness.
The affidavit stated that the whole report of the National Security Committee in so far as it related to the findings of misconduct against him was unsustainable “to the extent that on the basis of the evidence before it, particularly the evidence of witnesses that appeared before it, no reasonable tribunal of fact applying itself seriously to the evidence, could have reached the conclusions against me in the manner the committee did”.
A date is yet to be fixed for hearing.

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

A-G's Dept defends seizure of passport

Tuesday, July 14, 2009 (Page 3 Lead)

THE detention of the passport of Mr Akwasi Osei-Adjei, a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, by the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) has been defended by the Attorney-General's Department.
According to the AG's Department, Mr Osei-Adjei, who was suspected of causing financial loss to the state through the importation of huge quantities of rice, was likely to abscond if he had access to his passport.
In an affidavit in opposition filed in response to a suit initiated by Mr Osei-Adjei against the Director of the BNI and the Attorney-General for violating his fundamental human rights, the A-G's Department stated that Mr Osei-Adjei’s suit was aimed at detracting the BNI from investigating his unlawful importation of rice, as well as inflating the price of the rice.
According to Mr Osei-Adjei, the seizure and detention of his passport by officials of the BNI was “flagrantly unlawful and a palpable violation” of his human rights but the A-G’s Department holds a different view.
According to the AG's Department, the BNI was mandated under the Security and Intelligence Agencies Act (Act 526) to investigate the applicant.
The affidavit in opposition, dated July 8, 2009, said the applicant was being investigated by the state for acts or omissions which had caused huge economic loss to the state.
It said instead of arresting and granting him bail, the BNI decided to invite him to assist in investigations and to restrict his movement while investigations continued.
It further argued that the BNI’s decision to detain the applicant's passport was "perfectly legal and constitutional", adding that it was in accordance with the fundamental human rights provisions in the 1992 Constitution and more particularly under Article 14 (1) (g) of the 1992 Constitution.
Article 14 (1) (g) of the 1992 Constitution states, "A person can be deprived of his personal liberty upon reasonable suspicion of his having committed or about to commit criminal offence under the laws of Ghana."
It further stated that Article 14 (3) of the Internal Security Agencies Act states that the internal security agencies had the right to detain or restrict the movement of the applicant upon reasonable suspicion of his having committed a criminal offence under the laws of Ghana.
It said the BNI was permitted under the laws of the land to restrict one's movement to ensure that subjects of criminal investigation such as Mr Osei-Adjei appeared before the BNI to continue with proceedings preliminary to trial.
According to the AG's Department, the applicant was suspected to have committed a serious offence which was detrimental to the economic well-being of the state and he was requested to deposit his passport to ensure that he did not travel outside the jurisdiction.
"This is more so when internal security agency has intelligence report which indicates that the applicant is likely to abscond from the jurisdiction at the least opportunity," the affidavit in opposition pointed out.
It said the suspicion that the applicant would abscond from the jurisdiction was heightened by his "craving and pleading" to be given his passport at a time he was aware that he was been investigated for the offence of unlawful importation of rice, as well as inflating the cost of the imported rice.
It further stated that the Director of the BNI would, at the hearing of the case, raise preliminary objection that he was not a proper party to the action on the grounds that under the law he was not a legal entity to sue or be sued.
According to the Director of the BNI, the whole action had been brought by the applicant to detract the BNI from acting in accordance with its mandate to continue with investigations into the applicant's acts.
The hearing of the writ has been fixed for hearing at the Human Rights Division of the High Court on Thursday, July 16, 2009.

Cop accuses accomplice of lying

Tuesday, July 14, 2009 (Page 31)

ONE of the policemen who are standing trial with 11 others for allegedly robbing a businessman yesterday openly accused one of his alleged accomplices of lying to the circuit court hearing the case.
Deputy Superintendent of Police Patrick Kwapong could not hide his rage when one of the accused persons, Lance Corporal Karimu Muntari, in his evidence-in-chief, told the court that DSP Kwapong had sent him (Muntari) and two of his colleagues to investigate an alleged narcotic business being undertaken by Mr Kwaku Duah.
DSP Kwapong had earlier, in his evidence-in-chief, informed the court that he had not sent Muntari and one of the accused persons, Constable Benjamin Blejumah, to the hotel but Muntari told the court yesterday that he (Muntari), Blejumah and one of the accused persons, Constable Ken Duodu Acheampong, had been sent by DSP Kwapong to the hotel.
Barely 15 minutes into Muntari’s testimony, the visibly angry and shaken DSP Kwapong blurted, pointed accusing fingers at Muntari and uttered, “He is speaking a pack of lies. You are a blatant liar!”
But the trial judge, Mr Justice Mahamadu Iddrisu, did not take kindly to DSP Kwapong’s conduct.
The judge reminded Kwapong that he (Kwapong) was a “very senior officer”, while Muntari was a “very junior officer” and for that matter he (Kwapong) must not interfere in Muntari’s evidence.
Counsel for Kwapong, Mr Ellis Owusu Fordjour, apologised on behalf of his client and advised his client to act with decorum.
Muntari, who was later directed by the court to continue with his evidence-in-chief, avoided DSP Kwapong’s piercing gaze throughout his testimony.
Muntari is standing trial with DSP Kwapong of the Rapid Response Unit of the Ghana Police Service, Chief Inspector Thomas Adu, Sergeant John Agyapong, Blejumah, Aams Amanor, Kwasi Tawiah, Peter Kwame Gyasi and Bismark Ampofo for allegedly playing various roles in the attack and robbery of Mr Duah.
The accused persons have all pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and robbery and have been refused bail. Acheampong, Jeffrey Kwame Attah, aka Kay, and three others whose names have not been provided are on the run.
The accused persons were alleged to have robbed Mr Duah, who lives in Europe, at a hotel in Accra and taken away $53,000, €1,000 and GH¢2,000. They were also alleged to have robbed the victim of a black bag containing two compact disc Walkman players, a set of keys, a digital camera, a cheque book and other items, all valued at $4,000.
Led by his counsel, Mr Shahadu Mohammed, to give his evidence-in-chief, Muntari told the court that between 8.30 a.m. and 9 a.m. on February 2, 2009, DSP Kwapong had called him (Muntari) personally to his (Kwapong’s) office and tasked him (Muntari), Blejumah and Acheampong to go to Tema and effect the arrest of a drug suspect.
It was at that point that Kwapong accused Muntari of lying to the court. After the court’s intervention, Muntari continued and stated that he and the others got to the Tema Roundabout only for the driver of the Toyota Corolla on which they were travelling to inform them that Kwapong had found that the businessman was lodging in a hotel in Accra and not Tema.
Muntari said the driver, whom he did not know and who was not present in court, turned the vehicle around and drove straight to the hotel in Accra, where they met Adu, Agyapong and Quansah who had arrived in a Mercedes Benz.
He also told the court that he saw Adu and Acheampong struggling with Mr Duah. The two (Adu and Acheampong) eventually handcuffed Mr Duah and put him in the waiting Mercedes Benz.
According to Muntari, he also saw a soldier and a civilian in suit emerge from the reception near Mr Duah’s room with both holding two brown parcels.
He said Adu directed the soldier and the civilian to put the parcels in the Toyota Corolla, adding that the man who had driven him (Muntari), Blejumah and Acheampong to the hotel left the hotel premises in a red pick-up, leaving the Toyota Corolla behind.
Muntari said Acheampong joined Adu in the Mercedes Benz, while Blejumah drove him (Muntari) in the Toyota Corolla to the Tesano Police Depot.
The accused person also told the court that at the Police Depot, he (Muntari) gave the four brown envelopes which were in the possession of Acheampong and the soldier to Adu, who in turn put them in a black plastic bag and marched Mr Duah to Kwapong.
According to Muntari, he did not know the content of the envelopes because nobody told him what the contents were, adding that Kwapong later ordered him and Blejumah to go back to the office.
The prosecution is expected to cross-examine Muntari on Friday, July 17, 2009.
Earlier, Quansah had told the court during cross examination from counsel for Adu, Mr Dominic Kwame Nyamkon Tetteh, that he had not seen Adu slap Mr Duah.
He further stated that he did not see Adu remove an envelope from Mr Duah’s pocket.

Monday, July 13, 2009

Cop on trial denies claims

July 6, 2009 (Page 28)

ONE of the policemen who were alleged to have assaulted and robbed a businessman at a hotel in Accra has denied claims that he posed as a narcotics officer on the day the businessman was robbed.
Corporal Lawrence Dennis Quansah also denied taking pictures of the businessman, Mr Kwaku Duah, at the Tesano Police Depot on February 2, 2009.
According to the accused person, he also did not observe anyone taking pictures of Mr Duah on the said day.
Quansah, Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Patrick Kwapong of the Rapid Response Unit of the Ghana Police Service, Chief Inspector Thomas Adu, Sergeant John Agyapong, Lance Corporal Karimu Muntari, Constable Benjamin Blejumah, Aams Amanor, Kwasi Tawiah, Peter Kwame Gyasi and Bismark Ampofo are standing trial for allegedly playing various roles in the attack and robbery of Mr Duah.
Corporal Quansah, Chief Inspector Adu, Sergeant Agyapong, Lance Corporal Muntari, Constable Blejumah, Amanor, Tawiah, Gyasi and Ampofo are charged with conspiracy and robbery while DSP Kwapong has been charged with two counts of conspiracy and stealing.
The accused persons have pleaded not guilty to the charges and have been refused bail by the court, presided over by Mr Mahamadu Iddrisu. Acheampong, Jeffrey Kwame Attah, aka Kay, and three others whose names have not been provided are on the run.
The accused persons were alleged to have robbed Mr Duah, who lives in Europe, at a hotel in Accra and taken away $53,000, €1,000 and GH¢2,000. They were also alleged to have robbed the victim of a black bag containing two compact disc Walkman players, a set of keys, a digital camera, a cheque book and other items, all valued at $4,000.
Led by his counsel, Mr Ekow Korsah, to give his evidence-in-chief, Quansah said he, Adu and Sgt. Agyapong were on their way to eat when Adu received a call that someone was conducting illegal business at a hotel and therefore they should go and investigate.
He said on reaching the hotel he and his colleagues (Adu and Agyapong) realised Mr Duah was being manhandled by a police constable and a soldier.
According to the accused person, Jeffrey also showed up and claimed Mr Duah was involved in illegal business. He, however, told the court that nothing incriminating was found on Mr Duah.
He further stated that Mr Duah was taken to the Tesano Police Depot to meet DSP Kwapong but explained that he was not present when Mr Kwapong and the others interacted with Mr Duah.
He said although he later reminded Adu that they should go and buy food as planned, Adu told him (Quansah) that Mr Duah had complained that he (Mr Duah) had been robbed and needed assistance to retrieve his money from the robbers at Tema.
For that reason, the accused person said, he decided to join Adu, Kwapong and Agyapong to escort Mr Duah to Tema to retrieve his (Mr Duah's) money.
He said when the car that was being driven by Agyapong got to the Tema Motorway roundabout, Mr Duah requested that the car should be stopped to enable him (Mr Duah) to call a friend.
According to Quansah, Aams arrived some minutes later and it was during a meeting among Aams, Mr Duah, Adu and Kwapong that Aams pointed at Ampofo, who was then standing nearby, as one of the men who robbed Mr Duah.
Quansah said he (Quansah) arrested Ampofo and shoved him into the parked Mercedes Benz vehicle but Aams requested that Ampofo's arrest would lead to the abscond of the other suspects who were yet to be arrested for robbing Mr Duah.
He explained that he released Ampofo and at that point Mr Duah, Adu, Kwapong and Aams exchanged telephone numbers and parted.
He, therefore, denied any wrongdoing and claimed innocence over charges of conspiracy and robbery levelled against him.
He is expected to be cross-examined by a Chief State Attorney, Ms Cynthia Lamptey, on July 13, 2009.

Friday, July 3, 2009

Accused policeman denies charges

Friday, July 3, 2009 (Page 19)

SERGEANT John Agyapong, one of the seven policemen who were alleged to have assaulted and robbed a businessman at a hotel in Accra has denied the offence of conspiracy and robbery.
According to him, he neither conspired nor teamed up with the other accused persons to assault and rob the businessman, Mr Kwaku Duah, on February 2, 2009.
Agyapong is standing trial with Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Patrick Kwapong of the Rapid Response Unit of the Ghana Police Service, Chief Inspector Thomas Adu, Corporal Lawrence Dennis Quansah, Lance Corporal Karimu Muntari, Constable Benjamin Blejumah, Aams Amanor, Kwasi Tawiah, Peter Kwame Gyasi and Bismark Ampofo for allegedly playing various roles in the attack and robbery of Mr Duah.
Sergeant Agyapong, Chief Inspector Adu, Agyapong, Corporal Quansah, Lance Corporal Muntari, Constable Blejumah, Amanor, Tawiah, Gyasi and Ampofo are charged with conspiracy and robbery.
DSP Kwapong has been charged with two counts of conspiracy and stealing.
Acheampong, Jeffrey Kwame Attah, aka Kay, and three others whose names have not been provided are on the run. The accused persons have pleaded not guilty to the charges and have been refused bail by the court, presided over by Mr Mahamadu Iddrisu.
The accused persons were alleged to have robbed Mr Duah, who lives in Europe, at a hotel in Accra and taken away $53,000, €1,000 and GH¢2,000. They were also alleged to have robbed the victim of a black bag containing two compact disc Walkman players, a set of keys, a digital camera, a cheque book and other items, all valued at $4,000.
Led by his counsel, Mr Charles Lwanga Puozuing, to give his evidence-in-chief, Agyapong said he drove Adu and Quansah to the hotel where Mr Duah lodged on February 2, 2009 to investigate an alleged illegal gold business but said he did not get down from the vehicle.
According to Agyapong, who spoke through an interpreter, Mr Duah was later taken to the Tesano Police Depot to meet DSP Kwapong, who had instructed them through Adu to go and investigate what was happening at the hotel.
He said he was not privy to what happened at the Police Depot because he did not get down from the vehicle, adding that he (Agyapong), DSP Kwapong and Adu later drove Mr Duah to Tema to enable Mr Duah to look for persons who he (Mr Duah) had accused of stealing his money.
During cross-examination from Ms Cynthia Lamptey, a Chief State Attorney, the accused person admitted he had stated in his caution statement that Adu had told him (Agyapong) that DSP Kwapong had instructed them to go to the hotel and rescue someone who was being attacked.
He explained that the inaccuracy in his evidence-in-chief and caution statement in respect of their mission at the hotel was because he was earlier made to believe that he and the others were to rescue someone under attack at the hotel.
He, therefore, denied an assertion from Ms Lamptey that his latest evidence was an afterthought, adding that he did not communicate with Adu in order to strategise to rob Mr Duah.
During cross-examination from the counsel for Adu, Mr Kwame Nyankon-Tetteh, the accused person told the court that he did not see Adu threaten to shoot Mr Duah and further stated that he did not see anyone empty the pocket of Mr Duah and later handing it over to Adu.
Agyapong told the court during cross-examination from the counsel for Quansah, Mr Ekow Korsah, that Quansah, who was then with him (Agyapong) and Adu enroute to eat, ended up at the hotel based on the call Adu received from Kwapong.
He also told the court that he did not know Aams prior to the incident when he was cross-examined by the counsel for Aams.
Answering questions under cross-examination from Blejumah, the accused person told the court that he did not interact with Blejumah, who he saw standing by the main gate of the hotel.
He told the court that he neither saw Blejumah around Mr Duah at the hotel nor at the Tesano Police Depot.
Agyapong also told the court during cross-examination from Mr Geoffrey Osafo-Osei, the counsel for Tawiah, Gyasi and Ampofo, that he did not know the three prior to the incident and also did not see them at the hotel or the Tesano Police Depot.
Hearing continues today (July 3, 2009).