Monday, March 29, 2010

ANANE, 3 OTHERS FOR COURT

Monday, March 29, 2010 (Lead Story)

A FORMER Minister of Transport, Dr Richard Anane, and three others will be arraigned before the Accra Fast Track High Court on Tuesday for causing financial loss to the state.
Dr Anane is alleged to have misrepresented facts on Ghana International Airlines (GIA), which was then not in existence, to Cabinet and misled the then government to pay shares into a fraudulent company.
His action, according to the state, also led to the liquidation of Ghana Airways.
Dr Anane has been charged with Mr Kwadwo Mpiani, a former Chief of Staff; Dr Anthony Akoto Osei, a former Minister of State at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, and Mr Sammy Crabbe, a former Greater Accra Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and one of the minority shareholders of the GIA.
They were alleged to have played various roles in the formation of the airline and, in the process, caused huge financial loss to the state.
Osei allegedly signed a loan agreement committing the government to a financial obligation of paying GH¢15 million to the Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT).
The SSNIT gave the said amount to the GIA as a loan, without parliamentary approval and at a time when the minority shareholders of the airline had abandoned the company.
Mpiani, on his part, is alleged to have authorised the release of funds into the GIA, without parliamentary approval.
They are expected to be charged with fraud, stealing and wilfully causing financial loss to the state.
A highly placed source at the Attorney-General’s Department told the Daily Graphic in an interview that charges levelled against the four would be filed at the Registry of the Fast Track High Court today.
According to the source, the four had been formally charged but it declined to state the specific charges each of them would face.
It said Crabbe, who represented minority shareholders in the company, on June 27, 2005 withdrew $1.9 million from the government of Ghana’s account, without approval from the government (majority shareholder).
It said Dr Anane declared that four companies had expressed interest in the then Ghana Airways.
According to the source, he later presented a letter of intent which was signed between the government of Ghana and the GIA to form a new company called the New Ghana Airways (NGA), although the GIA was at that time not in existence.
It said although PriceWaterhouseCoopers had rated the NGA, which had signed an agreement with the government to form the GIA, third beneath KLM and Ghanaiar, two companies which had also bid for Ghana Airways, the NGA won the bid.
It said although the memorandum Dr Anane presented to Cabinet to sign was dated September 9, 2004, the GIA was not in existence as of September 9, 2004.
It said GIA-USA-LLC was formed in Utah, USA, on September 10, 2004 and further pointed out that Dr Anane misrepresented those facts to Cabinet and fraudulently misled it to pay for shares into a fraudulent company.
According to the source, Mpiani, on June 2, 2005, wrote to the chairman of the government task force on Ghana Airways Limited authorising the task force to take all necessary steps to put the airline into formal liquidation.
The GIA was subsequently formed as a joint venture between the government of Ghana and GIA/USA/LLC, as a result of which the GIA had its maiden flight on October 29, 2005.

Six drag CHRAJ to court

Saturday, March 27, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

SIX persons who were alleged to have been cited in the Mabey & Johnson bribery scandal, have dragged the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) to the High Court praying the court to stop the CHRAJ from investigating or hearing the bribery case.
In an application for judicial review, the six are praying the court to issue an order of prohibition to prevent the CHRAJ from conducting any further hearing into the allegation of corruption in the Mabey & Johnson investigations.
The six — Messrs Kwame Peprah, Alhaji Baba Kamara, Alhaji Boniface Abubakar Saddique, Alhaji Amadu Seidu, Brigadier-General Lord Attivor and Dr Ato Quarshie — were alleged to have compromised themselves during Mabey & Johnson Limited operations in Ghana between 1993 and 2006 but have denied any wrongdoing.
In an application for judicial review, the six accused the Commissioner of CHRAJ, Mr Francis Emil Short, of discussing the pending case before the commission extensively on a Metro TV programme and making very prejudicial statements on the matter.
According to the applicants, Mr Short was quoted on “Good Evening Ghana”, a current affairs programme on Metro TV, as stating that the preliminary objection raised as to the jurisdiction of CHRAJ to investigate private individuals was incompetent and would be dismissed by the Supreme Court.
An affidavit in support of the motion for judicial review, which was sworn on behalf of the applicants by Mr Peprah, stated that it was wrong for the commissioner to state that there was no basis for Alhaji Kamara to raise preliminary objections on the grounds that he (Alhaji Kamara) was not a public official at the time the alleged offence was committed but he (Mr Short) would all the same refer the matter to the Supreme Court for interpretation.
“That I am advised by counsel that, that ruling delivered by CHRAJ was most improper in that having come to the conclusion that there was an issue for interpretation of the Constitution by the Supreme Court, CHRAJ’s only duty was to comply with the provisions of the 1992 Constitution and refer the issue for interpretation of the Constitution to the Supreme Court but not to offer any opinion on same,” the affidavit in support pointed out.
The affidavit further stated that counsel for the applicants raised an objection to the effect that the commission’s mandate as provided under Article 218(e) related to only current public officers and not former public officers.
It said the CHRAJ accordingly adjourned ruling on the issue of whether or not it had jurisdiction to investigate ex-public officers to March 29, 2010.
According to the applicants, the CHRAJ overruled their objection to the appointment of a private legal practitioner to represent the commission and further adjourned its reasons to March 29, 2010.
It further pointed out that a day after the hearing and specifically on Tuesday March 16, 2010, Mr Short, the Head of the CHRAJ panel hearing the case, granted an extensive interview on Metro TV, which lasted an hour, and stated among others that documents he had received from the UK indicated that moneys paid to the applicants were bribes.
Such assertion by Mr Short, according to the applicants, was unfortunate, as he had by his statement already predetermined the case and come to a conclusion that the applicants had received bribes.
“That Commissioner Short in answer to a question from the interviewer inferred that our preliminary objection raised as to whether CHRAJ had the power to investigate ex-public officials was without any basis whatsoever. This was when he stated that ‘the Baba Kamara case is slightly different’.
“The inference was that the case against the ex-public officials which was raised on our behalf would not be referred to the Supreme Court. I am advised by counsel that this was most strange in that CHRAJ had reserved ruling on the case for March 29, 2010,” the affidavit in support stated.
“That Commissioner Short further stated that even though he had referred the issue of whether the CHRAJ could investigate a private person for interpretation to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court would dismiss the said preliminary objection.
“Indeed he went into details and explained the objection raised by 2nd Applicant which he described as the ‘the Baba Kamara issue’.
“He added that he could on his own have dismissed the preliminary objection but he had to refer the issue for interpretation only because the Supreme Court is the only body mandated by the Constitution to interpret the Constitution and not because it had any merit.
“Indeed, to a question asked as to whether he was hopeful that the Supreme Court would endorse his view and dismiss the preliminary objection raised he answered in one word ‘definitely’,” the affidavit said.
The applicants said a copy of the recording of the interview had been obtained and a careful perusal of it indicated that Mr Short was most “unprofessional”, as well as intended to incite the public against them.
“That I am advised by counsel and believe same to be true that it is most unprofessional for a judicial or quasi-judicial official such as Commissioner Short to discuss the views of the panel in a pending case before it with a third party and on national television and that the conduct of Commissioner Short, who stated that he was speaking for and on behalf of commission, is such that we cannot be guaranteed a fair hearing before CHRAJ,” the affidavit in support stated.
According to the applicants, their counsel had by a letter dated the March 17, 2010 requested that Mr Short and the commission should cease any further hearing in the matter on the grounds that “CHRAJ by the interview has shown that it is biased and we could not be guaranteed a fair hearing” but stated that the CHRAJ had failed to respond to the letter.
According to the applicants, Mr Short deliberately granted the interview “to incite the public against us. It was done deliberately to put pressure on the Supreme Court to dismiss the preliminary objection which had been referred by CHRAJ itself to the court”.
“That I am advised by counsel that it is improper on the part of Commissioner Short, a quasi-judicial officer, to go on air and discuss the views of chraj sitting on a pending matter in which they are the only adjudicators. We further state that the interview, which to all intends and purpose was voluntary, was without any basis whatsoever, is unwarranted and not supported by any law.
That we are of the firm belief that we cannot be guaranteed a fair hearing and that the CHRAJ be prohibited from any further hearing of the Mabey& Johnson investigation,” the affidavit in support pointed out.
According to the applicants, prohibiting CHRAJ “from investigating us would give meaning to the fact that justice should not only be done but should be seen to be manifestly being done.”

Counsel urged to rescind decision

Friday, March 26, 2010 (Page 31)

FAMILY members of the two soldiers accused of killing Alhaji Issa Mobilla are appealing to counsel for the soldiers who withdrew his services on Monday to rescind his decision.
Corporal Yaw Appiah and Private Eric Modzaka have, accordingly, prayed the High Court to give them a few days to either search for a new lawyer or convince their lawyer to come back and defend them in the trial in which they are facing two counts of conspiracy and murder.
Private Modzaka made the appeal at the court’s sitting in Accra yesterday and stated that he and Cpl Appiah’s family members were currently prevailing on the lawyer to continue defending them.
He made the announcement after the trial judge, Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefe, had enquired whether or not they had succeeded in procuring the services of a new lawyer.
A Chief State Attorney, Ms Ann Penelope Marmattah, did not object to the soldiers’ plea, with the explanation that the two were facing trial of indictment and it was important they had access to legal counsel.
Mr Justice Dzamefe granted their request and adjourned the case to Tuesday, March 30, 2010.
He, however, indicated that the court would solicit the services of the Legal Aid to assign them legal representation if they did not procure the services of a lawyer by March 31, 2010.
He reiterated his advice to the media to report only matters which occurred in the courtroom.
On Monday, March 22, 2010, counsel for the two soldiers, Mr Thaddeus Sory, withdrew his services after the court had upheld the prosecution’s plea to recall a witness who had already testified in the case.
Mr Justice Dzamefe announced Mr Sory’s withdrawal after he had briefly met the defence and prosecution teams in his chambers. He said Mr Sory cited personal reasons for his withdrawal.
The soldiers, who have pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and murder of Alhaji Mobilla, the former Northern Regional Chairman of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), sat in awe and bewilderment after the judge had announced their lawyer’s decision.
A third accused person, Private Seth Goka, is on the run and will be tried in absentia.
It all began when a Chief State Attorney, Ms Penelope Ann Marmattah, prayed the court to allow the prosecution to recall Lance Corporal Mathias Avenori, following Sergeant George Mensah Kpligli’s evidence that he (Sgt Kpligli) had been present when Appiah hit Mobilla’s chest with a stick.
Sgt Kpligli had also told the court that he was demoted, while his two colleagues were dismissed from the Ghana Police Service, following their insistence to state the exact issues which had led to Mobilla’s death on December 9, 2004.
Sgt Kpligli’s testimony received a sharp rebuttal from Mr Sory, who accused him of being the person who had begun assaulting Mobilla when he (Mobilla) refused to be put behind bars.
Mr Sory also accused Sgt Kpligli of concocting stories against the soldiers when he (Sgt Kpligli) had clearly stated the contrary in his caution statement.
He also described as unfortunate the prosecution’s application to recall L/Cpl Avenori after it had called, interviewed and later put L/Cpl Avenori in the box to state issues which had no bearing with Sgt Kpligli’s testimony.
Mr Sory described the prosecution’s application as “an application to reconstruct the case” and said it would be most unfortunate and unfair if the court allowed the prosecution to recall the witness.
Replying, Ms Marmattah explained that Sgt Kpligli’s revelations came only last Friday when he was interviewed by the prosecution and further stated that the prosecution was only after the truth.
In his ruling, the trial judge, Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefe, said the law permitted the court to use its discretion and for that reason he would grant leave and allow the prosecution to recall the witness in the interest of justice and for the truth to prevail.

Bawku MP wins another case

Friday, March 26, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

THE Member of Parliament (MP) for Bawku Central, Mr Adamu Daramani Sakande, yesterday won another legal victory over the cattle farmer who instituted legal action against the MP at the High Court last year.
His victory was as a result of the Court of Appeal’s decision to affirm its earlier decision which set aside the cattle dealer’s writ of summons which challenged the MP’s nationality.
Exactly a week yesterday, the Court of Appeal declared the decision by the High Court which ordered the MP to vacate his seat as null and void.
The court had, in a unanimous decision, held that the writ of summons filed by Mr Sumaila Biebel which challenged the eligibility of the MP to stand for election and to be subsequently elected as an MP “was wrong in law”.
It, accordingly, upheld submissions for counsel for the MP, Mr Yonny Kulendi, which described Mr Biebel’s action as an electoral petition “dressed as a constitutional enforcement action” and awarded costs of GH¢2,000 against Mr Biebel.
At the Court of Appeal’s sitting in Accra yesterday, it was of the view that there was no point delving into Mr Sakande’s appeal against the High Court’s decision not to set aside its default judgement to enable the MP to file his defence on the grounds that the court’s earlier order had “overtaken” what it would have done yesterday.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice A. Asare-Korang, Mr Justice S. E. Kanyoke and Mr Justice W. H. K. Addo, accordingly upheld Mr Sakande’s appeal and awarded GH¢2,000 costs against Mr Biebel.
Mr Sakande was represented by Mr Egbert Faibille, while Mr Biebel was represented by Dr Raymond Atuguba.
In a default judgement dated July 15, 2009, the High Court had declared that the MP owed allegiance to Britain and not Ghana and for that reason he could not hold a position as MP in Ghana following a writ of summons filed by Mr Biebel.
The High Court granted Mr Biebel’s application, which sought a declaration that the MP should be ordered to vacate his seat because he was a British national and, therefore, did not qualify to sit as MP.
However, lawyers for the MP appealed against the High Court’s decision on the grounds that Mr Biebel should have filed an electoral petition within 21 days after the declaration of the results, which Mr Biebel failed to do.
The lawyers, therefore, prayed the Court of Appeal to set aside the writ of summons which, they argued, Mr Biebel had filed months after Mr Sakande had been declared winner in the Bawku Central parliamentary election.
In his appeal, the MP had challenged the lower court’s jurisdiction and capacity and contended that the plaintiff’s suit was an electoral petition “dressed as a constitutional enforcement action”.

'Prisoners can vote'

Wednesday, March 24, 2010 (Frot Page)

THE Supreme Court, in a landmark decision on March 23, 2010, gave the nod to more than 13,586 remand and convicted prisoners in the country to exercise their franchise.
To cement its decision, the court directed the Electoral Commission (EC) to come out with a Constitutional Instrument (CI) to create the legal framework that will facilitate the inclusion of prisoners in the voters register for the next general election.
The court, presided over by the Chief Justice, Mrs Justice Georgina Theodora Wood, in a unanimous decision, upheld an application filed on behalf of remand and convicted prisoners by two legal practitioners, Messrs Ahumah Ocansey and Kojo Graham of the Centre for Human Rights and Civil Liberties (CHURCIL).
The two had, in separate suits which were consolidated by the court on November 12, 2009, prayed the court to declare as null and void sections of PNDC Law 284 which barred remand and convicted prisoners from voting.
Joined in the suit were the Attorney-General and the EC.
The A-G’s Department had opposed the suit on the grounds that the reliefs being sought by the two lawyers were against the public interest, while the EC had prayed the court to exclude it from the suit. The court, however, disagreed.
In a three-and-a-half-hour ruling, the court which had Dr Justice S. K. Date-Bah, Ms Justice Rose Owusu, Mr Justice Jones Dotse and Mr Justice Annin Yeboah as its members, ruled that, “The 1992 Constitution, per Article 42, grants all citizens of Ghana who are 18 years and above and are of sound mind the right to be registered to enable them to vote in all public elections and referenda.
“This right extends or includes all convicted prisoners, irrespective of the provisions of Section 7 (5) of the Representation of the People Law, 1992, (PNDC Law 284) which imposes a residency requirement or qualification under which convicted prisoners were deemed disqualified.”
It, therefore, declared as void Section 7 (5) of Law 284, since it was inconsistent with Article 42 of the 1992 Constitution.
It further stated that to avoid chaos and hasty decisions, it was imperative for the EC to come up with rules and regulations to regulate the registration exercise.
“This is to ensure that such an exercise is efficiently and effectively managed, controlled and directed to operationalise the registration of prisoners to enable them to vote in future elections and referenda such as will ensure harmonious interface with the Prisons Service Act 1972 NRCD 46 and all the other relevant stakeholders,” the court held.
In reply to the A-G’s opposition, it contended that it found it extremely difficult to understand what constitutionally legitimate interest was served by the non-recognition of the prisons as places of residence for the purpose of voter registration, even for those who had been convicted of high crimes such as subversion and high treason.
“Even for those who attempt to derail the democratic process, voting remains an important means of teaching them democratic values,” the court pointed out.
It commended the two legal practitioners “for taking up this important constitutional case on behalf of prisoners and for the industry they put into this work, which was done pro bono”.
According to the court, it could not overlook the crucial role played by the two lawyers who advanced the frontiers of human rights law in Ghana’s justice system free of charge to prisoners.

Pacific Institute opens branch in Ghana

Monday, March 22, 2010 (Page 38)

THE Pacific Institute (TPI), a development oriented organisation based in Seattle, USA, has set up an office in Ghana to oversee its operations in West Africa.
The Project Director in charge of West Africa, Mr Steve Pappajohn, told the Daily Graphic that the TPI, which operates in more than 60 countries, chose Ghana as its headquarters in West Africa because “Ghana is currently a vibrant place for business in Africa”.
Showering tonnes of praises on Ghana, Mr Pappajohn, who visited Ghana recently, said the country currently enjoyed a lot of international admiration for its thriving democracy and business atmosphere.
“Ghana is making great strides to become an economic force and this a great platform to grow on because there is a great deal of potential in Ghana which can be tapped by the TPI for the benefit of all,” he pointed out.
Mapping out the strategies for the Ghana office, he said facilitators would be trained in Ghana, while home-grown strategies would also be adopted.
He said programmes were drawn to suit the needs of employers and employees in order to build capacity to facilitate the progress of companies.
He explained that the TPI had a track record of changing the behavioural pattern of employees to align with the goals of their employers in order to fulfil the vision of their companies.
According to him, TPI had so far held meetings with heads of banks, manufacturing companies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), professional bodies, among others, adding that those meetings had so far been fruitful.
Mr Pappajohn expressed the hope that companies and the general public would embrace the TPI curriculum because “TPI has, over the years, propelled American companies to increase productivity at all levels”.
For his part, the local representative of TPI, Mr Christian Tetteh Sottie, said TPI had tried to operate in the country since 2004, with a focus on the public sector, but that did not yield many results.
He explained that attention had been shifted towards the corporate world where TPI had structured a curriculum to assist companies to cut down on expenditure, increase productivity and build the capacity of their workforce.
“We want to help companies to motivate their staff to achieve goals and increase their profit margins,” Mr Sottie added.

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Mobilla's case : Lawyer of accused steps down

Tuesday, March 23, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

Counsel for the two soldiers accused of killing Alhaji Issa Mobilla yesterday shocked his clients and the public when he withdrew his services.
Mr Thaddeus Sory, who had been defending Corporal Yaw Appiah and Private Eric Modzaka, withdrew his services after the court had upheld the prosecution’s plea to recall a witness who had already testified in the case.
The trial judge, Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefe, announced Mr Sory’s withdrawal after he had briefly met the defence and prosecution teams in his chambers.
The soldiers, who have pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and murder of Alhaji Mobilla, the former Northern Regional Chairman of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), sat in awe and bewilderment after the judge had announced their lawyer’s decision.
Mr Sory did not give any official reason for his decision but he had earlier openly stated his displeasure at the way and manner the prosecution was “ambushing” the defence as if the rights of the accused persons did not matter.
The court has since given the accused persons three days to procure the services of a lawyer. A third accused person, Private Seth Goka, is on the run and will be tried in absentia.
It all began when a Chief State Attorney, Ms Penelope Ann Marmattah, prayed the court to allow the prosecution to recall Lance Corporal Mathias Avenori, following Sergeant George Mensah Kpligli’s evidence that he (Sgt Kpligli) had been present when Appiah hit Mobilla’s chest with a stick.
Sgt Kpligli had also told the court that he was demoted, while his two colleagues were dismissed from the Ghana Police Service, following their insistence to state the exact issues which had led to Mobilla’s death on December 9, 2004.
The witness further alleged that the Northern Regional Police Commander at the time, Assistant Commissioner of Police Mr Oko Brakatu, had also destroyed several statements that he (Sgt Kpligli) had taken from witnesses in the case because Mr Brakatu had alleged that those statements were injurious to the image of the military.
According to him, he did not add those issues to his statement because he had been ordered not to do so.
Sgt Kpligli’s testimony received a sharp rebuttal from Mr Sory, who accused him of being the person who had begun assaulting Mobilla when he (Mobilla) refused to be put behind bars.
Mr Sory also accused Sgt Kpligli of concocting stories against the soldiers when he (Sgt Kpligli) had clearly stated the contrary in his caution statement.
He also described as unfortunate the prosecution’s application to recall L/Cpl Avenori after it had called, interviewed and later put L/Cpl Avenori in the box to state issues which had no bearing with Sgt Kpligli’s testimony.
Mr Sory described the prosecution’s application as “an application to reconstruct the case” and said it would be most unfortunate and unfair if the court allowed the prosecution to recall the witness.
Replying, Ms Marmattah explained that Sgt Kpligli’s revelations came only last Friday when he was interviewed by the prosecution and further stated that the prosecution was only after the truth.
In his ruling, the trial judge, Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefe, said the law permitted the court to use its discretion and for that reason he would grant leave and allow the prosecution to recall the witness in the interest of justice and for the truth to prevail.
The judge then stood the case down for a few minutes and entered his chambers.
Mr Sory sprang to his feet immediately the judge left, in utter dismay at the court’s decision.
Other lawyers and the prosecution looked on helplessly as Mr Sory openly expressed his frustration at the way the soldiers were being treated. He and the prosecution later went to the judge’s chambers where he formally announced his decision.
Earlier, the court had given Modzaka 24 hours to provide the particulars of the two persons he had claimed he had been with on the day Mobilla was allegedly killed, following a notice pleading alibi filed on his behalf by Mr Sory.
Mr Kpligli had, in his evidence-in-chief, told the court that he had been, on December 9, 2004, assigned to effect the arrest of Mobilla who was alleged to be supplying the youth of Tamale with ammunition to foment trouble.
He said Mobilla was neither at home nor in his office at the Bolgatanga-Tamale branch of the Ghana Private Road Transport Union (GPRTU) when he (Sgt Kpligli) visited those places. He later received information that Mobilla had shown up at the police station.
According to him, Mobilla gave a statement and denied any wrongdoing but he (Kpligli) later handed him (Mobilla) over to a female police officer, whom he named only as Sgt Akpene, to prepare Mobilla for cells around 1.48 p.m.
The witness said he had been instructed with two other officers, including L/Cpl Avenori, to transfer Mobilla to the Kamina Barracks to be placed under military guard.
He said he and the other officers spent about 30 minutes at the Kamina Barracks before leaving, adding that he also took statements from the accused persons who also denied any wrongdoing.
Hearing continues on March 25, 2010.

Monday, March 22, 2010

Mobilla caswe _ New revelations emerge

Saturday, March 20, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

ONE of the prosecutors in the trial of the two soldiers who are in the dock for allegedly murdering the ex-Northern Regional Chairman of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), Alhaji Issa Mobilla, yesterday told the Accra Fast Track High Court that new revelations bordering on the case had emerged.
A Chief State Attorney, Ms Penelope Ann Marmattah, therefore, prayed the court to give a short adjournment to enable “us put our house in order”.
According to her, the adjournment was needed to enable the prosecution to file the necessary papers.
She, however, did not disclose what those revelations were.
Ms Marmattah’s announcement and plea came almost two hours after the matter was scheduled to be heard.
Counsel for the soldiers, Mr Thaddeus Sory, said it was surprising for the prosecution to come up with those revelations after it had made the court to believe that two witnesses would be called yesterday.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefe, accordingly adjourned the matter to Monday, March 22, 2010.
Corporal Yaw Appiah and Private Eric Modzaka have pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and murder.
Their accomplice, Private Seth Goka, who is on the run, will be tried in absentia.
The court, on Thursday, granted a request by the prosecution to confine jurors in the case.
It, however, deferred the confinement to a later date after conferring with the prosecution, defence counsel and the registrar of the Fast Track High Court.
The registrar is expected to communicate the date on which the confinement will begin to the court.
A total of four witnesses have so far testified in the case which began full hearing on Wednesday, March 17, 2010.
The facts of the case are that Alhaji Mobilla was arrested by the police on December 9, 2004 for allegedly supplying the youth in Tamale with guns to foment trouble.
While he was in custody, the police received information that his followers and sympathisers were mobilising to free him. The deceased was consequently transferred from police cells to the Kamina Military Barracks and handed over to the three accused persons.
According to the prosecution, Alhaji Mobilla died three hours after he had been handed over to the accused persons who were on duty that day.

Friday, March 19, 2010

Suit against Bawku MP null and void

Friday, March 19, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

THE civil suit instituted against the Member of Parliament (MP) for Bawku Central at the Fast Track High Court by a cattle farmer suffered a blow yesterday when the Court of Appeal set aside the cattle dealer’s writ of summons.
In effect, the decision by the High Court which ordered the MP, Mr Adamu Daramani Sakande, to vacate his seat has been rendered null and void.
The court, in a unanimous decision, held that the writ of summons filed by Mr Sumaila Biebel which challenged the eligibility of the MP to stand for election and to be subsequently elected as an MP “was wrong in law”.
It upheld submissions for counsel for the MP, Mr Yonny Kulendi, which described Mr Biebel’s action as an electoral petition “dressed as a constitutional enforcement action”.
The court awarded costs of GH¢2,000 against Mr Biebel.
In a default judgement dated July 15, 2009, the High Court had declared that the MP owed allegiance to Britain and not Ghana and for that reason he could not hold a position as MP in Ghana following a writ of summons filed by Mr Biebel.
The High Court granted Mr Biebel’s application, which sought a declaration that the MP should be ordered to vacate his seat because he was a British national and, therefore, did not qualify to sit as an MP.
However, Mr Kulendi appealed against the High Court’s decision on the grounds that Mr Biebel should have filed an electoral petition within 21 days after the declaration of the results, which Mr Biebel failed to do.
Counsel, therefore, prayed the Court of Appeal to set aside the writ of summons which, he said, Mr Biebel had filed months after Mr Sakande had been declared winner in the Bawku Central parliamentary election.
In a unanimous decision, the court, presided over by Mr Justice J. A. Akamba, upheld Mr Kulendi’s submissions and held that the writ of summons which challenged the eligibility of the MP to stand for election and to be subsequently elected as MP “was wrong in law”.
The court, which had Messrs Justices Samuel Marful-Sau and C. J. Hornyenugah as panel members, accordingly set aside the writ of summons after citing authorities to buttress its decision.
After the court’s ruling, Mr Kulendi prayed the court to award GH¢15,000 costs against Mr Biebel, but counsel for Mr Biebel, Dr Raymond Atuguba, said the figure was on a high side and it would scare potential litigants from seeking redress in court.
The court then decided on GH¢2,000 costs against Mr Biebel.
In his appeal, the MP had challenged the lower court’s jurisdiction and capacity and contended that the plaintiff’s suit was an electoral petition “dressed as a constitutional enforcement action”.
Mr Biebel indicated that he would appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision at the Supreme Court.

Mobilla case - Prosecution's request granted

Friday, March 19, 2010 (Centre Spread)

THE Fast Track High Court yesterday granted a request by the prosecution to confine jurors in the case in which two soldiers have been accused of murdering the ex-Northern Regional Chairman of the Convention People's Party (CPP), Alhaji Issa Mobilla.
The court, however, deferred the confinement to a later date after conferring with the prosecution, defence counsel and the registrar of the Fast Track High Court.
The registrar is expected to communicate the date on which the confinement will begin to the court, presided over by Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefe.
Corporal Yaw Appiah and Private Eric Modzaka have pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and murder.
Their accomplice, Private Seth Goka, who is on the run, will be tried in absentia.
In its ruling, which the foreman of the seven-member jury described as a “blow” to him and his colleagues, the court directed that the cellular phones of the jurors be seized during their confinement.
It also barred the jurors from reading newspapers, watching television, listening to radio or receiving visitors during their confinement.
The trial judge gave the all-male jury the assurance that the court would hear the case on a daily basis to avoid any delay and inconvenience to them.
The court also warned the media to report only matters which occurred in the court and desist from interviewing witnesses in the case.
Its warning came as a result of a complaint from counsel for the accused persons, Mr Thaddeus Sory, who accused Joy FM, a private radio station, of interviewing a witness in the case after the court’s session on Wednesday.
Two police officers, namely, Sergeant Christian Adzakpo and Detective Inspector Anthony Kwaku Kuor, testified at the court’s sitting in Accra yesterday.
Sgt Adzakpo, who is stationed at the Tema Office of the Criminal Investigations Department (CID), told the court that he had been directed on December 11, 2009 by his superior officer to take pictures of the late Alhaji Mobilla at the Tamale Government Hospital mortuary.
According to Sgt Adzakpo, who was at the time stationed in the Tamale office of the Ghana Police Service, he was accompanied by two colleagues to the mortuary to take the pictures.
He said he saw bruises on Alhaji Mobilla’s neck, which he described as “marks of assault”, and further informed the court that he also took pictures when a pathologist arrived from the Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital to do an autopsy.
Sgt Adzakpo tendered the pictures in evidence. The jurors were allowed to view them.
During cross-examination from Mr Sory, the witness said his camera could not tell the date the pictures were taken and further stated that he did not have anything to do with the deceased.
For his part, Inspector Kuor told the court that he had, on December 9, 2009, been directed to transfer Alhaji Mobilla from the cells at the Tamale Police Station to the military cells at the Kamina Barracks.
According to him, he and two other colleagues handed over Alhaji Mobilla to military personnel, including the two accused persons, who were on duty that day.
He denied an assertion from defence counsel that Ahaji Mobilla was not a healthy person at the time he was being transferred from the police cells.
Hearing continues today.
The facts of the case are that Alhaji Mobilla was arrested by the police on December 9, 2004 for allegedly supplying the youth in Tamale with guns to foment trouble.
While he was in custody, the police received information that his followers and sympathisers were mobilising to free him. The deceased was consequently transferred from police cells to the Kamina Military Barracks and handed over to the three accused persons.
According to the prosecution, Alhaji Mobilla died three hours after he had been handed over to the accused persons who were on duty that day.

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Zita complets testimony against Asamoah-Boateng

Wednesday, March 17, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

THE Minister of Tourism, Mrs Zita Okaikoi, has completed her testimony in the GH¢86,915.85 renovation works at the Ministry of Information trial involving Mr Stephen Asamoah-Boateng and his wife, Zuleika.
The court discharged Mrs Okaikoi, also a former Minister of Information, at its sitting in Accra yesterday after lawyers for Mr Frank Agyekum, a former Deputy Minister of Information, and Yasmin Domua, a manageress, had indicated that they had no questions for Mrs Okaikoi.
She had, on previous dates, been cross-examined by the other defence lawyers.
When the matter was called yesterday, Messrs Egbert Faibille, counsel for Mr Agyekum, and Thaddeus Sory, counsel for Yasmin, told the court that they had no questions for Mrs Okaikoi, who began testifying in the case from September 2009.
A Chief State Attorney, Mr Anthony Gyambiby, described the lawyers’ decision as a "pleasant surprise" but indicated that he had not brought fresh witnesses to court yesterday because he had expected the lawyers to cross-examine Mrs Okaikoi.
The court also granted permission to Zuleika to travel abroad after her lawyer had pleaded with the court to that effect.
The presiding judge, Mr Justice Charles Quist, however, directed her to return before April 29, 2010, which is the next adjourned date.
Mr Asamoah-Boateng and his wife are standing trial with Mr Agyekum, Kofi Asamoah-Boateng, a former Director of Finance and Administration at the Ministry of Information; Kwabena Denkyira, a former Deputy Director of Finance and Administration at the ministry; Domua, Prosper Aku of Supreme Procurement Agency Ltd and the company as an entity.
Mr Asamoah-Boateng, together with his wife and the others, are standing trial for allegedly conspiring to contravene the Procurement Act by not following due processes in obtaining a contract amounting to GH¢86,915.85 for renovation work at the Ministry of Information.
Sampong is facing six counts of conspiracy, contravention of the Procurement Act, attempt to defraud, altering document and deceit of public officer, while Agyekum has been charged with conspiracy, contravention of provision, attempt to defraud and deceit of public officer.
Domua, a manageress and cousin of Zuleika’s, is charged with conspiracy to commit crime, after which she was granted a GH¢10,000 bail with two sureties.
Kofi Asamoah-Boateng faces six counts of forgery of official document, possession of forged document and forgery and possession of false document, while Denkyira also faces a charge of conspiracy.
Prosper has also been charged with four counts of possessing and forgery of document of architects, engineering certificate and a false tender document.
All the accused persons have pleaded not guilty to the charges and have all been admitted to bail.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

NDC, NPP fans in showdown

Tuesday, March 16, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

THERE was a showdown between supporters and opponents of Nana Darkwa Baafi, who is standing trial for allegedly publishing false news with intent to cause alarm, as the two groups pelted each other with stones.
A similar showdown between Nana Baafi’s supporters and opponents occurred on March 3, 2010 when they rained insults on each other.
At the sitting of the Cocoa Affairs Court yesterday, his supporters and opponents staged another showdown but this time they threw stones at each other outside the inner perimeter of the court.
It all began when opponents of Baafi did not take kindly to the level of moral support received by him when he stepped out of the courtroom to board a waiting pick-up truck. The two groups initially engaged in verbal insults but the exchanges degenerated into the pelting of stones at each other.
After a series of stone-throwing and insults, most of whom are unprintable, the two groups went their separate ways, promising to catch up with each other on the next adjourned date.
Earlier, the trial judge, Mr C.A. Wilson, had issued a subpoena to Top Radio, ordering it to furnish the court with the recording in which Baafi was alleged to have stated that former President J. J. Rawlings intentionally set fire to his own house on February 14, 2010.
The court issued the subpoena after the prosecutor in the case, Deputy Superintendent of Police Mr E. Y. Frimpong, had prayed the court to issue a subpoena to the radio station on the grounds that the court’s registrar had stated that he could only issue the subpoena based on a court order.
Counsel for the accused person, Mr Kwame Akuffo, was of the view that it was not necessary for the court to issue the subpoena on the grounds that the prosecution could have filed an application at the registry.
Baafi’s plea was not taken again because the prosecution substituted the charge sheet, although the charges and facts of the case remained the same.
He has been charged with one count of publishing false news with intent to cause alarm under Section 208 of Act 60 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The facts of the case were that on February 18, 2010, the accused person went to the radio station as a panel member in a radio discussion programme and during the discussions the host raised the issue of the recent fire outbreak at the former President’s residence.
The prosecution stated that the accused person, who was not present during the fire outbreak and without any truth, stated, among other things, that the former President had intentionally caused the fire outbreak to compel the current President to relocate him.
According to the prosecution, the statement incensed the public and a sizeable number of people rushed to the radio station, ostensibly to attack the host and the panel members.
The police rushed to the scene to restore law and order and subsequently whisked the panel members away to safety.
It further stated that Baafi admitted the offence during interrogation at the Accra Regional Police Headquarters and asked for forgiveness.
The complainant in the case is Mr Kofi Adams, the Spokesperson for former President Rawlings.

Yams were cut and stuffed with cocaine • NACOB tells court

Friday, March 12, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

AN officer of the Narcotics Control Board (NACOB) yesterday told the Accra Fast Track High Court that he took both still and video pictures when a search was being conducted in the bag of Ibrahim Sima, the Chief Executive of the Exopa Modelling Agency.
According to the officer, during the search, three tubers of yam were found to have been cut and resealed after they had been stuffed with cocaine.
Mr Shadrach Bosomtwe, the Head of the NACOB Unit at the Cargo Section of the Kotoka International Airport (KIA), said he had been instructed to take both video and still pictures during a search on Sima, who was arrested at the KIA on September 7, 2009.
Led by a Principal State Attorney, Mr George K. Ofori, to give his evidence-in-chief, the witness told the court that the accused person opened his baggage, which he had locked with a password, and it was during a search in it that cocaine was found stuck in the tubers of yam.
The witness said the accused person neither went through NACOB nor Customs, Excise and Preventive Service (CEPS) formalities before checking in his baggage.
Mr Bosomtwe said a member of staff of the airline on which Sima was about to travel, his (Bosomtwe’s) superior officer and about five NACOB officials were present when Sima’s bag was being searched.
According to the witness, other persons present also took pictures of the search and during the tests on the substances found in the yam which tested positive for cocaine.
During cross-examination by Mr James Agalga, counsel for Sima, the witness denied an assertion that he had personally picked the accused person’s bags from the conveyer belts, searched them and dumped them on the floor, along with other bags.
Mr Bosomtwe also denied an assertion that he knew the accused person before his arrest on that fateful day.
The witness also told the court that one of the difficulties faced by NACOB officials was the failure by passengers to go through NACOB and CEPS checkpoints.
Sima, 39, was arrested at the KIA on September 7, 2009 after security officials had found three tubers of yam containing cocaine in his baggage while going through departure formalities for a trip to Germany.
He is currently on remand in prison custody.
He has pleaded not guilty to two counts of possessing narcotic drugs and attempting to export narcotic drugs without lawful authority.
The facts of the case are that Sima was arrested after NACOB officials had found that three out of four tubers of yam in his baggage had been cut open and re-sealed.
The three tubers of yam were found to contain cocaine, a narcotic drug.

Friday, March 12, 2010

Yams were cut and stuffed with cocaine • NACOB officer tells court

Friday, March 12, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

AN officer of the Narcotics Control Board (NACOB) yesterday told the Accra Fast Track High Court that he took both still and video pictures when a search was being conducted in the bag of Ibrahim Sima, the Chief Executive of the Exopa Modelling Agency.
According to the officer, during the search, three tubers of yam were found to have been cut and resealed after they had been stuffed with cocaine.
Mr Shadrach Bosomtwe, the Head of the NACOB Unit at the Cargo Section of the Kotoka International Airport (KIA), said he had been instructed to take both video and still pictures during a search on Sima, who was arrested at the KIA on September 7, 2009.
Led by a Principal State Attorney, Mr George K. Ofori, to give his evidence-in-chief, the witness told the court that the accused person opened his baggage, which he had locked with a password, and it was during a search in it that cocaine was found stuck in the tubers of yam.
The witness said the accused person neither went through NACOB nor Customs, Excise and Preventive Service (CEPS) formalities before checking in his baggage.
Mr Bosomtwe said a member of staff of the airline on which Sima was about to travel, his (Bosomtwe’s) superior officer and about five NACOB officials were present when Sima’s bag was being searched.
According to the witness, other persons present also took pictures of the search and during the tests on the substances found in the yam which tested positive for cocaine.
During cross-examination by Mr James Agalga, counsel for Sima, the witness denied an assertion that he had personally picked the accused person’s bags from the conveyer belts, searched them and dumped them on the floor, along with other bags.
Mr Bosomtwe also denied an assertion that he knew the accused person before his arrest on that fateful day.
The witness also told the court that one of the difficulties faced by NACOB officials was the failure by passengers to go through NACOB and CEPS checkpoints.
Sima, 39, was arrested at the KIA on September 7, 2009 after security officials had found three tubers of yam containing cocaine in his baggage while going through departure formalities for a trip to Germany.
He is currently on remand in prison custody.
He has pleaded not guilty to two counts of possessing narcotic drugs and attempting to export narcotic drugs without lawful authority.
The facts of the case are that Sima was arrested after NACOB officials had found that three out of four tubers of yam in his baggage had been cut open and re-sealed.
The three tubers of yam were found to contain cocaine, a narcotic drug.

Asabee's case : Attorney, lawyer clash over issues

March 6, 2010 (Page 19)

THE case involving a former Minister of Information, Mr Stephen Asamoah-Boateng, and eight others who are standing trial over GH¢86,915.85 renovation works at the ministry was turned into series of disagreements when a Chief State Attorney and a defence lawyer clashed on a number of issues.
It all began when the Chief State Attorney, Mr Anthony Gyambiby, accused Mr Augustines Obour, who was once a State Attorney but now in private practice, of wasting the court and everyone’s time following his (Mr Obour’s) demand for more documents from Mrs Zita Okaikoi, the immediate past former Minister of Information, although Mr Obour had failed to cross-examine on documents earlier tendered by Mrs Okaikoi.
Mrs Okaikoi had, on the last adjourned date, indicated that she had recorded confessions of Mr Obour’s client, Dominic A. Y. Sampong, a former acting Chief Director at the ministry, who had apologised for signing for the payment of the contract on her behalf without her notice.
Mr Obour then urged her to tender the alleged recording and other documents yesterday, which she did, but Mr Obour indicated that he could not cross-examine her on them without studying them.
Some few minutes after cross-examining Mrs Okaikoi, Mr Obour then urged her to bring along the record book which recorded letters that came to her secretariat from July 2008 but Mr Gyambiby sprang to his feet and wondered what Mr Obour was up to.
Mr Obour had earlier requested to listen to the alleged confession on Mrs Okaikoi’s cellular phone in order to compare it with what was on the CD she had brought to the courtroom but his request received stiff opposition from Mr Gyambiby and that set the tone for a series of disagreements between the two who used to prosecute cases together.
According to Mr Gyambiby, Mr Obour had, throughout his cross-examination, not asked a single relevant question and rather relied on requesting for more documents which he (Mr Obour) would eventually not cross-examine the witness on.
He then turned to Mr Obour, who stood at a far end, and said, “You came to fish for evidence and nothing else.”
But Mr Obour indicated that he (Mr Obour) was not a fisherman, to which Mr Gyambiby replied, ”You are a proverbial fisherman.”
Mr Obour disagreed with Mr Gyambiby and kept reminding Mr Gyambiby that he (Mr Gyambiby) had taught him (Mr Obour) prosecution and ought to know better.
The trial judge, Mr Justice Charles Quist, eventually intervened and ruled that the witness was not under any obligation to produce official documents.
He then advised Mr Obour to request those documents through a subpoena or through his client and further ruled that in any case the requested document was not relevant to the case.
After the ruling, Mr Obour attempted to take along the CD containing the alleged confession by Sampong for study but Mr Gyambiby protested and insisted that the disc could be tampered with outside the court premises and took the disc away from the bewildered Mr Obour.
Mr Gyambiby advised that Mr Obour could listen to the recording after it had been tendered in evidence but Mr Obour had indicated that he had no intention of tendering the recording unless he listened to it and decided what to do with it.
Mrs Okaikoi told the court that she had recorded the confession and apology because the matter had been dear to her heart and she wanted to avoid future denials.
Hearing continues on Wednesday, March 10, 2010.
Asamoah-Boateng and his wife, Zuleika, are standing trial with Sampong; a former Deputy Information Minister, Frank Agyekum; Kofi Asamoah-Boateng, a former Director of Finance and Administration at the Ministry of Information; Kwabena Denkyira, a former Deputy Director of Finance and Administration at the ministry; Yasmin Domua, a manageress; Prosper Aku of Supreme Procurement Agency Ltd and the company as an entity.
Sampong is facing six counts of conspiracy, contravention of the Procurement Act, attempt to defraud, uttering document and deceit of public officer, while Agyekum has been charged with conspiracy, contravention of provision, attempt to defraud and deceit of public officer.
Domua, a manageress and cousin of Zuleika’s, who was absent at the first sitting, was charged with only conspiracy to commit crime, after which she was granted a GH¢10,000 with two sureties.
Kofi Asamoah-Boateng faces six counts of forgery of official document and possession of forged document, while Denkyira also faces only a charge of conspiracy.
Prosper has also been charged with four counts of possessing and forgery of document of architects, engineering certificate and false tender document.
All the accused persons have pleaded not guilty to the charges and have all been admitted to bail.

Court stays proceedings in Issa Mobilla's case

March 4, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

THE Fast Track High Court has stayed proceedings in the case involving two soldiers, who are alleged to have murdered the Northern Chairman of the Convention People's Party (CPP), Alhaji Issa Mobilla.
The court stayed proceedings to enable Corporal Yaw Appiah and Private Eric Modzaka to pursue an appeal against the court's ruling, which refused them access to the list of potential, who would be empanelled to decide their fate.
The soldiers have proceeded to the Supreme Court after the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's decision not to allow them access to the list of potential jurors.
Explaining the rationale for his decision, Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefi, explained that the core issue before the court was the request for list of potential jurors and it would, therefore, be most unfair if he allowed the matter to go on and the Supreme Court at the end of the day decides to allow the accused persons access to the list of potential jurors.
He, however, gave counsel for the accused persons two weeks or hearing would begin adding that the matter would be heard on a daily basis.
The judge explained that he used his discretion to stay proceedings although he was not bound to do so and further explained that he had not received any directive to that effect from a higher court.
Mr Justice Senyo also reminded parties in the case that his colleague judge's order from the Tamale High Court which directed that the accused persons be remanded in prison custody was still in force.
He made the remarks after observing that the military police had escorted the accused persons to court as had always been the case.
Counsel for the accused persons, Mr Thaddeus Sory, informed the court that “we will advise ourselves”.
Earlier, a Chief State Attorney, Mr Edward Agyemang-Duodu, had stated that the court could not stay proceedings because there was no order from a high court.
Opposing, Mr Sory said every court had the inherent power to stay proceedings in any case.
Hearing continues on March 17, 2010.
The Court of Appeal on February 2, 2010, declined to stay proceedings in the criminal case because it did not believe the application for stay of proceedings ought to be granted because it was not supported by law or practice.
The court also held that the soldiers were unable to demonstrate the exceptional circumstance by which a stay of proceedings could be granted.
The Accra Fast Track High Court had, on December 17, 2009, refused a request by the two soldiers to have access to the full list of jurors on the grounds that their request, if granted, had the potential of influencing or intimidating the potential jurors.
The court also reminded the accused persons that they had the right to challenge the jurors after they had been empanelled and were about to be sworn in.
The court is yet to give its ruling on whether or not to grant the state’s request for jurors in the case to be confined throughout the trial.
The two soldiers are alleged to have acted with Private Seth Goka, who is currently on the run.
The facts of the case are that Alhaji Mobilla was arrested by the police on December 9, 2004 for allegedly supplying the youth in Tamale with guns to foment trouble.
While he was in custody, the police received information that his followers and sympathisers were mobilising to free him. The deceased was consequently transferred from police cells to the Kamina Military Barracks and handed over to the three accused persons.
According to the prosecution, Alhaji Mobilla died three hours after he had been handed over to the accused persons who were on duty that day.

Monday, March 1, 2010

TOR Fire : Tanker driver liable

Saturday, February 27, 2010 (Front Page)

THE committee set up to investigate the recent fire outbreak at the loading gantry of the Tema Oil Refinery (TOR) has estimated the damage caused at $2.5 million, while products lost are valued at GH¢120,000.
Five road tankers were totally burnt, while two were severely damaged.
The committee has recommended that a fuel tanker driver and his mate should be held fully accountable.
According to it, the tanker driver restarted his ignition several times after loading premix fuel and that resulted in the fire outbreak which killed two persons and injured six others on January 19, 2010.
The six-member committee, chaired by Mr E. Quartey, a former General Manager of the Health, Safety and Environment Division of TOR, which presented its 24-page report to Mr Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah, a Deputy Minister of Energy in charge of Petroleum, also recommended that the management of TOR must improve its safety mechanisms.
Other members of the committee who were also present at the brief ceremony were Dr Yaw Akoto, the Managing Director of the Bulk Oil Storage and Transport Company Limited; Mr J. W. Mensah, the Deputy Chief Fire Officer; Nii Lantey Blankson, an official from the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI); Lt Col Diamond Akplor, a retired Army officer, and Ms Daphne Akonor, a lawyer with the Attorney-General’s Department.
The committee further recommended the adoption of a better leadership style at the refinery and pointed out the need for better supervision from the appropriate authorities, such as the National Petroleum Authority (NPA).
It also recommended, among others, that regulations for safety must be enforced, complied with and monitored to avoid such fires in future.
Mr Quartey expressed the hope that the government would implement the recommendations to avoid fires in future, especially at a time when the country had discovered oil in commercial quantities.
He said the committee received much co-operation from the staff of the refinery, the NPA, tanker drivers and other stakeholders.
For his part, Mr Buah thanked the committee for doing thorough work and gave the assurance that the government would take into serious consideration its recommendations.
He described TOR as a very strategic national asset and said it was critical that such national assets were guided with jealous care to avoid future fires.
He expressed regret that lives were lost during the fire and gave the assurance that the government would ensure that persons who were responsible were held accountable.
The committee, which was inaugurated on January 21, 2010, two days after the fire, was tasked to investigate the cause(s) of the fire outbreak, ascertain the extent of damage and evaluate the appropriate existing safety and security measures at TOR.
The committee, which began work on January 25, 2010, was also expected to recommend measures necessary to address the lapses in safety and security at TOR, as well as identify any safety and security issues which, in its opinion, were relevant to the cause of the investigation and make appropriate recommendations.

Enquirer Editor fined GH¢2,400

Saturday, February 27, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

THE Financial Division of the High Court, in a Biblical manner, tempered justice with mercy and spared the Editor of the Enquirer newspaper, Mr Raymond Archer, of imprisonment after he was convicted last Wednesday for contempt of court.
The presiding judge, Mr Bright Mensah, after quoting Proverbs 28:13, which states, “He who covers his sins will not prosper but whoever confesses and forsakes them will have mercy”, fined Mr Archer and his newspaper 200 penalty units or in default face two weeks’ imprisonment.
Each penalty unit is worth GH¢12. Mr Archer has since paid the total GH¢2,400 fine.
Mr Archer, who was accompanied to the courtroom by his lawyer, Mr Tony Lithur, walked out of the court premises after he had paid the fine.
Mr Lithur told the court that his client had retracted and apologised for publishing stories which had imputed that a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Akwasi Osei-Adjei, and a former Managing Director of the National Investment Bank (NIB), Charles Daniel Gyimah, who are standing trial for allegedly causing financial loss to the state, had influenced prosecution witnesses to testify in their favour.
The publications, with headlines: “Trial of Ricemasters — Osei-Adjei and Dan Gyimah Boxed. Secret Attempt to pay off witnesses uncovered” and “Ricemasters Trial Bombshell — Attempt to pay off witness uncovered. Culprits to face obstruction of Justice charge”, were published in the first and second weeks of December 2009 and that prompted counsel for Osei-Adjei, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, to sue Mr Archer for contempt.
Mr Archer has, accordingly, apologised to the accused persons as ordered by the court and retracted the stories in yesterday’s edition of the newspaper.
About 100 people wearing red apparel, with matching red armbands, thronged the court premises to support Mr Archer, who wore a brown suit.
The court held that after taking the submissions of both counsel in the case into consideration, it had accepted Mr Archer’s apology and, accordingly, tempered justice with mercy.
Mr Justice Mensah advised Mr Archer to be a “very good child” and not repeat his actions in future.
He reminded Mr Archer that Ghana was a governed country and for that reason the court would not condone any action that would put the country into flames, adding, “I would like to stay in the country after my retirement.”
On Wednesday, Mr Justice Mensah, in his ruling, described the publications as “reckless and irresponsible” and, accordingly, ordered Archer, who could not substantiate them, to retract them and apologise to the court, the applicants and the general public before Friday, February 26, 2010.
The court then granted Archer bail in the sum of GH¢50,000 with one surety and further ordered him to reappear yesterday, February 26, 2010, for sentencing.
He expressed surprise as to how Archer came by such a story which he (Archer) could not prove in court.
He said much as he believed in press freedom and recognised the media as the watchdog over the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary, the watchdog must be punished if it broke loose.
According to the court, Archer was guilty of the serious form of contempt because he had attempted to jeopardise the rights of the applicants to a fair trial, adding that the publications were intended to excite popular prejudice against the applicants and for that reason Archer’s action amounted to a media trial.
In the substantive matter, which has been adjourned to March 11, 2010, Osei-Adjei and Gyimah have been accused of wilfully causing financial loss to the state for allegedly acting together to steal 2,997 bags of rice, valued at US$1,408,590.
However, lawyers for the accused persons have argued that diplomatic efforts embarked upon by the accused persons to solve the food shortage in the country have been “criminalised”.
The two have been charged with eight counts of conspiracy, contravention of provisions of the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663), using public office for profit, stealing and wilfully causing financial loss to the state.
They have pleaded not guilty to the charges and were each admitted to bail in the sum of GH¢200,000 with two sureties each to be justified.

Graphic accountants jailed

THE Accra Circuit Court has sentenced two accounts officers of the Graphic Communications Group Limited (GCGL) to a total of 14 years for stealing the company’s GH¢140,000.
Daniel Tsagli, an accounts clerk stationed at the company’s Ho office, and Frank Oduro, an accounts officer, were said to have failed to lodge in the company’s account at the Ghana Commercial Bank (GCB) the money collected from vendors and agents of the company from January 2007 to March 2008.
Tsagli will serve a 10-year jail term after he was found guilty on three counts of forgery of documents, possession of forged documents and stealing, while Oduro, who was convicted on one count of abetment, will serve four years behind bars.
The two had pleaded not guilty to the charges but the court held that they had not been able to prove their innocence during the trial.
The trial judge, Mrs Ivy Heward-Mills, held that the prosecution had been able to lead ample evidence to prove that Tsagli and Oduro acted together to deprive the GCGL of GH¢140,000.
The facts of the case were that some time in April 2008, the company was preparing its accounts for the 2007 financial year when it detected that Tsagli had failed to lodge GH¢140,000 which he had collected from vendors and agents of the company in the company’s account with GCB.
Instead, Tsagli presented fake pay-in slips to show he had deposited the said amount at the bank.
Investigations revealed that Tsagli had secured a stamp similar to that of the Ho branch of the GCB and stamped various pay-in slips amounting to GH¢140,000.
In his attempt to cover up his deeds, he forged signatures purported to be those of tellers of the bank and presented them to the head office of the company.
Tsagli, who had been on the run after the theft was detected, surrendered himself to the police on May 19, 2008 but he could not offer any tangible explanation for his actions in his caution statement to the police.
The police also found that Tsagli had sent two of the pay-in slips to Oduro to work on but Oduro did not key in those slips into the company’s accounting system, thereby making it difficult for Tsagli’s activities to be detected.
Tsagli had also told the police that he had sent all the pay-in slips to Oduro but Oduro denied and stated that he received only two of the said slips.
The court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution and the accused persons, found the two guilty and sentenced them accordingly.

Court convicts Editor of Enquirer

February 23, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

THE Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court yesterday convicted the Editor of the Enquirer newspaper, Mr Raymond Archer, for contempt of court.
Mr Archer was also ordered to retract stories after he had failed to substantiate publications which imputed that a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Akwasi Osei-Adjei, and a former Managing Director of the National Investment Bank (NIB), Charles Daniel Gyimah, who are standing trial for allegedly causing financial loss to the state, had influenced prosecution witnesses to testify in their favour.
The publications, with headlines: “Trial of Ricemasters - Osei-Adjei and Dan Gyimah Boxed. Secret Attempt to pay off witnesses uncovered” and “Ricemasters Trial Bombshell - Attempt to pay off witness uncovered. Culprits to face obstruction of Justice charge”, were published in the first and second weeks of December 2009.
The publications prompted counsel for Osei-Adjei, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, to file contempt proceedings against Archer.
The trial judge, Mr Justice Bright Mensah, in his ruling, described the publications as “reckless and irresponsible” and, accordingly ordered Archer to retract them and apologise to the court, the applicants and the general public before Friday, February 26, 2010.
The court then granted Archer bail in the sum of GH¢50,000 with one surety and further ordered him to reappear on Friday for sentencing.
Mr Justice Mensah expressed surprise as to how Archer came by such a story which he (Archer) could not prove in court.
He said much as he believed in press freedom and recognised the media as the watchdog over the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary, the watchdog must be punished if it broke loose.
According to the court, Archer was guilty of the serious form of contempt because he had attempted to jeopardise the rights of the applicants to a fair trial.
It said the publications were intended to excite popular prejudice against the applicants and for that reason Archer’s action amounted to a media trial.
It further argued that media trial had inherent dangers because one was normally condemned well before he/she got the opportunity to respond to accusations.
The court, therefore, held that counsel for Osei-Adjei had proved Archer’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt and, accordingly, convicted him.
After the court had read its ruling, counsel for Archer, Mr Tony Lithur, pleaded for mitigation.
The matter was called around 9 a.m. but Archer was not present, prompting the court to stand the matter down to 10 a.m.
Archer, who wore a dark suit, looked calm after the court had passed its verdict.
In the substantive matter, which has been adjourned to March 11, 2010, Osei-Adjei and Gyimah have been accused of wilfully causing financial loss to the state for allegedly acting together to steal 2,997 bags of rice, valued at US$1,408,590.
However, lawyers for the accused persons have argued that diplomatic efforts embarked upon by the accused persons to solve the food shortage in the country have been “criminalised”.
The two have been charged with eight counts of conspiracy, contravention of provisions of the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663), using public office for profit, stealing and wilfully causing financial loss to the state.
They have pleaded not guilty to the charges and were each admitted to bail in the sum of GH¢200,000 with two sureties each to be justified.

Court given 14-day ultimatum • To comply with legal steps in litigation over GT sale

February 23, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

THE Supreme Court has given a Commercial Court judge hearing the litigation over the sale of Ghana Telecom (now Vodafone) 14 days to comply with the necessary legal steps before referring the matter to it for interpretation.
Within the 14-day period, the lower court is expected to summarise the case involving 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 GT to Vodafone.
According to the Supreme Court, the judge did not comply with Rule 67 of CI 16, which states that “a reference to the court for the determination of any question, cause or matter pursuant to any provision of the Constitution or of any other law shall be stated by the court below or by the person or authority making the reference”.
The Commercial Court judge, Mr Justice Henry Kwofie, is expected to state the specific issues in the case to the Supreme Court for determination, as well as state any findings of fact he might have made when the matter was before him.
The court, presided over by the Chief Justice, Mrs Justice Georgina T. Wood, made the order when it emerged that the High Court judge had not complied with aspects of Rule 67 of CI 16.
Other members of the panel were Mr Justice William A. Atuguba, Professor Justice S. K. Date-Bah, Mr Justice S. A. Brobbey, Ms Justice Rose Owusu, Mrs Justice Sophia Adinyira, Mr Justice Annin Yeboah, Mr Justice Jones Dotse and Mr Justice B. T. Aryeetey.
The Commercial Court, in November 2009, referred three issues on the constitutionality or otherwise of the sale of Ghana Telecom to the Supreme Court for determination.
The issues included whether or not aspects of the Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) dated July 3, 2008 and executed among the government of Ghana, Vodafone International and Ghana Telecom contravened the 1992 Constitution and, therefore, rendered the agreement void.
Also referred was the issue on whether or not any procedural, substantive errors and defects in the SPA were or could be cured through parliamentary ratification.
The third issue referred for determination by the Supreme Court was whether or not an agreement executed by the government and ratified by Parliament could be challenged at the High Court.
On October 23, 2009, the judge decided to refer aspects of the suit which bordered on the constitutionality or otherwise of the sale to the Supreme Court for interpretation, with the explanation that it was the sole preserve of the Supreme Court to interpret issues bordering on the Constitution.
The plaintiffs in the matter, Prof Akosa and five others, sued the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Ghana Telecommunications Company Limited and the Registrar-General over the sale of GT to Vodafone.
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 and they are calling for a declaration that the sale of GT is inimical to the public interest.
They are, therefore, seeking reliefs from the court, including a declaration that the agreement entered into by the government was not in accordance with due process of law and is, therefore, a nullity.