February 24, 2012
THE Commercial Court will on February 29, 2012 decide whether or not to allow the Attorney-General (A-G) to introduce fresh allegations of fraud against a beleaguered businessman Alfred Agbesi Woyome, who was paid GHC51.2 million in judgement debt.
According to the Attorney-General’s Department, Woyome obtained the judgement debt through fraudulent means and has, therefore, prayed the court to allow it to amend its writ of summons and statement of claim to include the element of fraud against Woyome.
The A-G is currently in court seeking an order for the refund of the judgement debt of GH¢51,283,480.59 paid to Woyome because it was procured by fraudulent means.
At the sitting of the Commercial Division of the High Court in Accra today, a Senior State Attorney, Mr Cecil Adadevoh, said should the grant the prayer, his outfit would lead evidence to prove that Woyome obtained the money through fraudulent means.
He prayed the court to allow his outfit to introduce the fresh evidence to enable Woyome to also respond to them.
Counsel for Woyome, Ms Dora Nortey, who opposed the state’s application said the judgement debt awarded to his client constituted an agreement between Woyome and the government.
She said since there was a contract between the two parties the A-G alone could not go to court to litigate without seeking the consent of Woyome.
Ms Nortey argued that the A-G was seeking to introduce which the court should not allow but in another vain urged the court to allow the A-G to lead evidence on the allegations of fraud to enable his client to respond.
Woyome was absent in court.
Among the reliefs contained in the writ filed at the Registry of the Commercial Division of the High Court, Accra, on Monday, January 16, 2012 is a declaration that the terms of settlement filed on June 4, 2010, to the effect that Mr Woyome should be paid the sum in three equal instalments of GH¢17,094,495.53, were procured by mistake on the part of the A-G and due to fraudulent misrepresentation by Mr Woyome.
Additionally, the A-G is seeking a declaration to set aside the consent judgement of the court on the grounds that Mr Woyome had no contract with the government and consequently lacked a cause of action and the capacity to make the said claim in any court of competent jurisdiction.
According to the A-G, all the agreements between the Government of Ghana and Vamed/Waterville (Waterville as an assignee of Vamed) were null, void and of no legal effect whatsoever, in accordance with Article 181 (5) of the Constitution, to have grounded any cause of action in Mr Woyome or any claimant pursuant to such a contract.
The A-G is seeking a declaration that all the processes filed and proceedings involving Mr Woyome and the A-G were null and void ab initio because Mr Woyome lacked the legal capacity to institute the suit, thereby rendering the consent judgement a nullity for the same reasons.
The A-G, in his proposed amended statement of claim, said he had now discovered new and more documents and information from diverse sources involved in the transaction between the government and Waterville that disclosed that the claims by Mr Woyome were fraudulent.
He averred that on May 4, 2005, the then Deputy Minister of Finance signed a letter of introduction which was given to Mr Woyome which stated that the government did not bear responsibility for any liabilities that would arise from the transactions.
Subsequently, following a change in government, Mr Woyome, knowing the contents of the letter and the disclaimer in it, knowingly and fraudulently misrepresented to the A-G that he was entitled to his claim.
The particulars of fraud indicated that Mr Woyome, in making his misrepresentation to the A-G, knew that his claim was untrue and, indeed, intended to deceive the A-G to authorise payment for the sum he claimed when he knew that the government was not liable to pay the sum to him.
Furthermore, the A-G said it was upon those misrepresentations that the government was liable to pay the two per cent for financial engineering that it authorised payments in several instalments to Mr Woyome and that he colluded with Waterville to write to the A-G misrepresenting and supporting the claims when both Mr Woyome and Waterville knew that Mr Woyome did not have any claims against the government.
It said some time in 2005, the government won the bid to host the Africa Cup of Nations football tournament (CAN 2008) and the award of the hosting rights to Ghana required that the country rehabilitated and refurbished its football stadia and other sporting facilities, including the Ohene Djan and the Baba Yara stadia.
The A-G averred that the government initiated a procurement process for the award of the contract to rehabilitate the stadia but cancelled the procurement process before it was completed.
According to the A-G, Waterville made various protests to the government on the purported abrogation of the procurement process and, in consequence of the protests, the government and Waterville entered into negotiations and settled their differences by signing a memorandum of understanding between them, dated November 30, 2005.
In that settlement, the parties agreed that the government would award the Ohene Djan Sports Stadium and El-Wak Stadium, both in Accra, on a turnkey basis to Waterville.
The A-G said in all the transactions, from the invitation to tender, the concurrent approval and purported abrogation, among others, the government dealt directly with Waterville or its accredited agent and later with Vamed and its accredited agents as assignees of the rights of Vamed.
He said the government had never entered into any contract with Mr Woyome in any form whatsoever in respect of the stadia projects or at all, and there was no contract on which Mr Woyome could have maintained any cause of action in the court or any court against the government.
The A-G said subsequent to the final judgement agreed with Mr Woyome to compromise the said judgement and that subsequent to the filing, the A-G had information that the terms of settlement had been procured by mistake.
That, the A-G said, was based on a letter by the then government, dated May 4, 2005 and signed by a Deputy Minister of Finance, Mr Kwaku Agyeman Manu, which stated that the government did not take responsibility and was not liable for any transaction entered into by Mr Woyome and that his role in the transaction did not create any legal relations with the Government of Ghana.
In his amended statement of defence and counter-claim, Mr Woyome also averred that the letter of May 4, 2005 referred to by the A-G was an election by the government at the time not to be responsible for any expenses that would be incurred by him in the course of his financial engineering but the same did not refer to the obligation of the government arising out of the successful completion of the financial engineering.
Mr Woyome further denied that the negotiation of the judgement obtained by him on May 24, 2010 was arrived at by mistake on the part of the A-G and that after he had obtained the judgement, he was invited by the A-G to a meeting on May 27, 2010.
As a result of meeting, an agreement was reached that the judgement debt be steeled by the payment of GH¢41,811,480.59 as the judgement debt of five million euros or its cedi equivalent.
The amount represented half of the interest awarded by the court and costs of GH¢25,000.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Case of review 230 Constituencies - Supreme Court dismisses application
February 24, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
THE Supreme Court has, by a unanimous decision, dismissed an application which prayed it to order the Electoral Commission (EC) to review the 230 constituencies in the country.
Two residents of Nungua in Accra, Messrs Richard Odum Bortier and Daniel Quaye, had filed an application praying the court to direct the EC to review the 230 constituencies as they stood now by altering them, following the publication of the enumeration figures of the 2010 Population and Housing Census, in accordance with the egalitarian principle of fair representation solidly embodied in the 1992 Constitution.
Also joined in the suit was the Attorney-General.
According to the court, the Supreme Court was not the proper forum to address that matter.
The court held that the proper forum for the plaintiffs was either the Regional Tribunal or the Court of Appeal.
It, accordingly, advised the plaintiffs, who were represented by Mr Ayikoi Otoo, to seek their reliefs at the courts designated by the Chief Justice.
No costs were awarded.
Later in an interview with journalists, Mr Otoo, a former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, said he had sent the matter to the Supreme Court because he had filed the application in July 2011, four clear months before the Chief Justice constituted the Regional Tribunal.
He said his clients would move to the Regional Tribunal for their reliefs to be looked into.
In the substantive application, the plaintiffs sought, among other things, a declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 47 clauses 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the 1992 Constitution, the boundaries as demarcated by the EC of Ghana shall be made so as to ensure that it was in accordance with the egalitarian principle of fair representation solidly embodied in the Constitution.
They also prayed the court to direct the EC to review the boundaries of all constituencies as they existed now by altering them in order to conform with Article 47 (3) and (4) of the Constitution, with emphasis on the population distribution in accordance with the egalitarian principle of fair representation in the Constitution.
THE Supreme Court has, by a unanimous decision, dismissed an application which prayed it to order the Electoral Commission (EC) to review the 230 constituencies in the country.
Two residents of Nungua in Accra, Messrs Richard Odum Bortier and Daniel Quaye, had filed an application praying the court to direct the EC to review the 230 constituencies as they stood now by altering them, following the publication of the enumeration figures of the 2010 Population and Housing Census, in accordance with the egalitarian principle of fair representation solidly embodied in the 1992 Constitution.
Also joined in the suit was the Attorney-General.
According to the court, the Supreme Court was not the proper forum to address that matter.
The court held that the proper forum for the plaintiffs was either the Regional Tribunal or the Court of Appeal.
It, accordingly, advised the plaintiffs, who were represented by Mr Ayikoi Otoo, to seek their reliefs at the courts designated by the Chief Justice.
No costs were awarded.
Later in an interview with journalists, Mr Otoo, a former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, said he had sent the matter to the Supreme Court because he had filed the application in July 2011, four clear months before the Chief Justice constituted the Regional Tribunal.
He said his clients would move to the Regional Tribunal for their reliefs to be looked into.
In the substantive application, the plaintiffs sought, among other things, a declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 47 clauses 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the 1992 Constitution, the boundaries as demarcated by the EC of Ghana shall be made so as to ensure that it was in accordance with the egalitarian principle of fair representation solidly embodied in the Constitution.
They also prayed the court to direct the EC to review the boundaries of all constituencies as they existed now by altering them in order to conform with Article 47 (3) and (4) of the Constitution, with emphasis on the population distribution in accordance with the egalitarian principle of fair representation in the Constitution.
Missing 77 parcels of cocaine - Asem Darkei charged
February 23, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
CHRISTIAN Sheriff Asem Darkei, alias The Limping Man, who was alleged to have played a major role in the shipment and disappearance of 77 parcels of cocaine weighing 2,310 kilogrammes with a street value of $138.6 million in April 2006 has been charged.
The accused person, who has been in hiding since 2006 until his arrest on February 2, 2012 was arrested by BNI officials at the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital upon a tip off.
He pleaded not guilty to the three counts of conspiracy, importation and exportation of narcotic drugs and was remanded to reappear before the Circuit Court, presided over by Ms Audrey Korcuvie-Tay on March 7, 2012.
Sheriff was indicted for allegedly paying $3,000 to a detective sergeant to facilitate his (Sheriff’s) escape.
The prosecutor, an Assistant Superintendent of Police, Mr A. A. Annor, had prayed the court to remand the accused person to enable the completion of investigations into the matter.
But the trial judge held that it was improper for the prosecution to hide behind the law and deprive Sheriff his liberty.
She, therefore, urged the prosecution to read out the charges on which the accused person was being held as well as take his plea.
Mr Annor obliged and read out the charges to which Sheriff denied any wrongdoing.
Counsel for Sheriff, Mr George Heward-Mills said the prosecution was holding his client over a mirage and stated that the court should grant his client bail if the prosecution delayed the trial.
He also complained that officials of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) made it impossible for him to have conference with his client.
Sheriff, who looked sober while in the dock was whisked away in a waiting vehicle some few minutes after hearing of his case.
According to the facts of the case at about midnight on April 26, 2006, a vessel, the MV Benjamin, reportedly carrying about 77 parcels of cocaine with each parcel weighing 30 kiolgrammes docked at Kpone/Tema and discharged the cocaine. It said the said 77 parcels were offloaded into a waiting vehicle which carried them away.
According to the prosecution, in the course of investigations, Sheriff’s name featured prominently as the importer and/or owner of the drug. He was said to be the person who chartered the vessel at a cost of $150,000 to tow another vessel from Guinea to Ghana.
Sheriff, the prosecution noted, was the person who carted the alleged 77 parcels on the ship’s arrival at Kpone.
The disappearance of the cocaine led to the constitution of the Georgina Wood committee and the subsequent trial of persons alleged to have played various roles.
In July 2008, an Accra Fast Track High Court, presided over by Mr Justice Anin Yeboah (now a Supreme Court judge ), convicted and sentenced Joseph Kojo Dawson, the owner of the MV Benjamin and Managing Director of Dashment Company Limited; Isaac Arhin, sailor; Phillip Bruce Arhin, mechanic; Cui Xian Li, the vessel engineer, and Luo Yui Xing, sailor, all crew members of the MV Benjamin, to 25 years in prison with hard labour. Phlip Bruce-Arhin, however, died barely three weeks after his conviction.
The convicts, including the deceased, were found guilty on charges of using property for narcotic offences, engaging in prohibited business relating to narcotics and possession of narcotic drugs without lawful authority.
A sixth accused person, Pak Bok Sil, a Korean national, was on Tuesday, October 16, 2007 acquitted and discharged by the court, which ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove a case against him.
Following the committee’s recommendations, the trial of Kwabena Amaning alias Tagor and Alhaji Issah on November 28, 2007 and they were sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment each with hard labour for conspiracy and engaging in prohibited business relating to narcotic drugs.
However, they were released on July 25, 2009 when they appealed against the High Court’s decision.
For aiding a fugitive, The Limping Man, to flee with 2,280 kilogrammes of cocaine, three policemen were in December 2007 sentenced to a total of 75 years imprisonment with hard labour by the Accra Fast Track High Court.
Sergeant David Nyarko, Detective Corporal Dwamena Yabson and General Lance Corporal Peter Bondorin, were sentenced to serve 25 years imprisonment each after the court found them guilty of receiving an unspecified amount in US dollars from Dakei and subsequently allowing him to flee.
Bondorin died in prison a few months after his conviction.
Although, the Georgina Wood Committee recommended that Sheriff be prosecuted, he had since 2006 proved elusive until his arrest in February 2012.
CHRISTIAN Sheriff Asem Darkei, alias The Limping Man, who was alleged to have played a major role in the shipment and disappearance of 77 parcels of cocaine weighing 2,310 kilogrammes with a street value of $138.6 million in April 2006 has been charged.
The accused person, who has been in hiding since 2006 until his arrest on February 2, 2012 was arrested by BNI officials at the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital upon a tip off.
He pleaded not guilty to the three counts of conspiracy, importation and exportation of narcotic drugs and was remanded to reappear before the Circuit Court, presided over by Ms Audrey Korcuvie-Tay on March 7, 2012.
Sheriff was indicted for allegedly paying $3,000 to a detective sergeant to facilitate his (Sheriff’s) escape.
The prosecutor, an Assistant Superintendent of Police, Mr A. A. Annor, had prayed the court to remand the accused person to enable the completion of investigations into the matter.
But the trial judge held that it was improper for the prosecution to hide behind the law and deprive Sheriff his liberty.
She, therefore, urged the prosecution to read out the charges on which the accused person was being held as well as take his plea.
Mr Annor obliged and read out the charges to which Sheriff denied any wrongdoing.
Counsel for Sheriff, Mr George Heward-Mills said the prosecution was holding his client over a mirage and stated that the court should grant his client bail if the prosecution delayed the trial.
He also complained that officials of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) made it impossible for him to have conference with his client.
Sheriff, who looked sober while in the dock was whisked away in a waiting vehicle some few minutes after hearing of his case.
According to the facts of the case at about midnight on April 26, 2006, a vessel, the MV Benjamin, reportedly carrying about 77 parcels of cocaine with each parcel weighing 30 kiolgrammes docked at Kpone/Tema and discharged the cocaine. It said the said 77 parcels were offloaded into a waiting vehicle which carried them away.
According to the prosecution, in the course of investigations, Sheriff’s name featured prominently as the importer and/or owner of the drug. He was said to be the person who chartered the vessel at a cost of $150,000 to tow another vessel from Guinea to Ghana.
Sheriff, the prosecution noted, was the person who carted the alleged 77 parcels on the ship’s arrival at Kpone.
The disappearance of the cocaine led to the constitution of the Georgina Wood committee and the subsequent trial of persons alleged to have played various roles.
In July 2008, an Accra Fast Track High Court, presided over by Mr Justice Anin Yeboah (now a Supreme Court judge ), convicted and sentenced Joseph Kojo Dawson, the owner of the MV Benjamin and Managing Director of Dashment Company Limited; Isaac Arhin, sailor; Phillip Bruce Arhin, mechanic; Cui Xian Li, the vessel engineer, and Luo Yui Xing, sailor, all crew members of the MV Benjamin, to 25 years in prison with hard labour. Phlip Bruce-Arhin, however, died barely three weeks after his conviction.
The convicts, including the deceased, were found guilty on charges of using property for narcotic offences, engaging in prohibited business relating to narcotics and possession of narcotic drugs without lawful authority.
A sixth accused person, Pak Bok Sil, a Korean national, was on Tuesday, October 16, 2007 acquitted and discharged by the court, which ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove a case against him.
Following the committee’s recommendations, the trial of Kwabena Amaning alias Tagor and Alhaji Issah on November 28, 2007 and they were sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment each with hard labour for conspiracy and engaging in prohibited business relating to narcotic drugs.
However, they were released on July 25, 2009 when they appealed against the High Court’s decision.
For aiding a fugitive, The Limping Man, to flee with 2,280 kilogrammes of cocaine, three policemen were in December 2007 sentenced to a total of 75 years imprisonment with hard labour by the Accra Fast Track High Court.
Sergeant David Nyarko, Detective Corporal Dwamena Yabson and General Lance Corporal Peter Bondorin, were sentenced to serve 25 years imprisonment each after the court found them guilty of receiving an unspecified amount in US dollars from Dakei and subsequently allowing him to flee.
Bondorin died in prison a few months after his conviction.
Although, the Georgina Wood Committee recommended that Sheriff be prosecuted, he had since 2006 proved elusive until his arrest in February 2012.
CID GRILLS OSAFO-MAAFO - For his role in the Woyome saga
February 22, 2012 (Lead Story)
THE Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service yesterday subjected a former Minister of Finance and Economic Planning (MoFEP), Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo, to a two-hour interrogation on his alleged role in the GH¢51.2 million Woyome judgement debt saga.
He was alleged to have cancelled procurement processes on the construction of new stadia for CAN 2008 during his tenure as Minister of Education and Sports.
Mr Osafo-Maafo, who was allowed to go home after interrogation, also gave a detailed account of what he knew about an alleged contract between the government of Ghana and Waterville.
He is the sixth official to be queried on the circumstances leading to the award and subsequent payment of GH¢51.2 million to the beleaguered businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, who is currently standing trial for defrauding the state.
Other persons invited for questioning in connection with the matter are a former Deputy Minister of Education and Sports, Mr O.B. Amoah, who is currently on a GH¢20 million bail, with two sureties.
A seventh official, a former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, under whose tenure the judgment debt was awarded to Woyome, has also indicated her willingness to assist the CID to unravel the truth.
Those standing trial alongside Woyome at the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court are a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh; the Director of Legal Services at the MoFEP, Paul Asimenu, and Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, Nerquaye-Tetteh’s wife, into whose account Woyome allegedly deposited GH¢400,000.
Counsel for Mr Osafo-Maafo, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, confirmed in an interview with the Daily Graphic that his client had been invited through him on Monday night to report to the CID Headquarters yesterday afternoon.
Mr Dame, who was present throughout the interrogation, said he and his client had reported at the CID before 12 noon but the interrogation began an hour later.
He further explained that Mr Osafo-Maafo tendered in evidence relevant documents to assist the police in their investigations.
He said his client basically justified why he had cancelled the procurement processes, which action, he claimed, saved the government more than $40 million.
Mr Dame argued that corruption did not come in at all because his client acted properly and within the confines of the law to protect the taxpayer’s purse.
“My client has not collected money from anybody; he has not caused any financial loss to the state,” he declared.
“We are willing and prepared to assist the police to expose any wrongdoing by any public officer connected with fraudulent payments to Woyome,” he added.
Counsel further stated that his client should receive commendation, instead of condemnation, for acting in a way to save the state millions of dollars which would have been lost.
Sources close to the CID confirmed that Mr Osafo-Maafo had not been charged. They also maintained that he had been invited to assist in investigations and was released to go home after questioning.
The atmosphere at the CID Headquarters was serene.
The General Secretary of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Mr Kwadwo Owusu-Afriyie, and a former Chief Executive of the Ghana Trade Fair Authority, Ms Esther Ofori, were at the precincts of the CID Headquarters to lend support to Mr Osafo-Maafo.
Mr Owusu-Afriyie maintained the innocence of his party members and urged President J. E. A. Mills to go after the real culprits in the Woyome saga.
THE Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service yesterday subjected a former Minister of Finance and Economic Planning (MoFEP), Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo, to a two-hour interrogation on his alleged role in the GH¢51.2 million Woyome judgement debt saga.
He was alleged to have cancelled procurement processes on the construction of new stadia for CAN 2008 during his tenure as Minister of Education and Sports.
Mr Osafo-Maafo, who was allowed to go home after interrogation, also gave a detailed account of what he knew about an alleged contract between the government of Ghana and Waterville.
He is the sixth official to be queried on the circumstances leading to the award and subsequent payment of GH¢51.2 million to the beleaguered businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, who is currently standing trial for defrauding the state.
Other persons invited for questioning in connection with the matter are a former Deputy Minister of Education and Sports, Mr O.B. Amoah, who is currently on a GH¢20 million bail, with two sureties.
A seventh official, a former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, under whose tenure the judgment debt was awarded to Woyome, has also indicated her willingness to assist the CID to unravel the truth.
Those standing trial alongside Woyome at the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court are a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh; the Director of Legal Services at the MoFEP, Paul Asimenu, and Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, Nerquaye-Tetteh’s wife, into whose account Woyome allegedly deposited GH¢400,000.
Counsel for Mr Osafo-Maafo, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, confirmed in an interview with the Daily Graphic that his client had been invited through him on Monday night to report to the CID Headquarters yesterday afternoon.
Mr Dame, who was present throughout the interrogation, said he and his client had reported at the CID before 12 noon but the interrogation began an hour later.
He further explained that Mr Osafo-Maafo tendered in evidence relevant documents to assist the police in their investigations.
He said his client basically justified why he had cancelled the procurement processes, which action, he claimed, saved the government more than $40 million.
Mr Dame argued that corruption did not come in at all because his client acted properly and within the confines of the law to protect the taxpayer’s purse.
“My client has not collected money from anybody; he has not caused any financial loss to the state,” he declared.
“We are willing and prepared to assist the police to expose any wrongdoing by any public officer connected with fraudulent payments to Woyome,” he added.
Counsel further stated that his client should receive commendation, instead of condemnation, for acting in a way to save the state millions of dollars which would have been lost.
Sources close to the CID confirmed that Mr Osafo-Maafo had not been charged. They also maintained that he had been invited to assist in investigations and was released to go home after questioning.
The atmosphere at the CID Headquarters was serene.
The General Secretary of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Mr Kwadwo Owusu-Afriyie, and a former Chief Executive of the Ghana Trade Fair Authority, Ms Esther Ofori, were at the precincts of the CID Headquarters to lend support to Mr Osafo-Maafo.
Mr Owusu-Afriyie maintained the innocence of his party members and urged President J. E. A. Mills to go after the real culprits in the Woyome saga.
O.B. Amoah charged with corruption, causing financial loss
February 21, 2012 (Front page)
A former Deputy Minister of Education and Sports in the Kufuor administration, Mr O.B. Amoah, was yesterday charged with two counts of corruption and willfully causing financial loss to the state.
That was after he had been arrested on Sunday night in connection with the payment of the GH¢51.2 million judgement debt to Alfred Agbesi Woyome, a businessman.
He was released on bail in the sum of GH¢20 million with two sureties.
He is the fifth person to be picked up, aside from Woyome, who allegedly made false claims to receive GH¢51.2 million in judgement debt; Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, a Chief State Attorney, Mr Paul Asimenu, the Director of Legal Services at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, and Mrs Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, Nerquaye-Tetteh’s.
As soon as Mr Amoah was released about 4.15 p.m, a large crowd of New Patriotic Party (NPP) faithful, family members and sympathisers surged forward to carry him shoulder high amid excitement and jubilation.
Earlier in the morning, NPP heavyweights, including the Minority Leader in Parliament, Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu; the General Secretary, Kwadwo Owusu-Afriyie, aka Sir John, several Members of Parliament, family members, friends and sympathisers besieged the premises of the Police Headquarters to give Mr Amoah moral support.
The National Youth Organiser of the NPP, Mr Anthony Karbo, expressed concern over the mode of Mr Amoah’s arrest, saying the police did not obtain explicit permission from the Speaker of Parliament to release Mr Amoah to them, as the law prescribed.
He said the NPP, as a party, was not against individuals being invited to help in investigations but maintained that due process must be followed.
Mr Thaddeus Sory, who was at the CID offices before 9 a.m. to secure bail for Mr Amoah, took a swipe at the police for attempting to humiliate and intimidate his client.
He accused the police, who had picked up his client from his home between 8 p.m. and 9 p.m., of mischief and maintained that “they could have acted more professionally”.
He said his client had denied any wrongdoing and submitted a written statement to the police.
Mr Sory was particularly disappointed at the failure of the police to reply to a letter he had written on February 15, 2012, in which he had indicated his client’s willingness to assist in investigations with regard to the payment of the GH¢51.2 million to Woyome, who is currently standing trial for fraud.
In the said letter, counsel said, he had indicated to the police to state the venue, date and time for his client to report and submit a written statement on what is now known as the Woyome saga.
“Rather than reply our letter, which clearly stated our intention and willingness to co-operate with investigations, they resorted to taking him off guard by effecting his arrest on a Sunday night,” counsel blurted.
“We find it strange that on a Sunday night, without any prior request that he should make himself available to assist in investigations, you go and effect his arrest,” Mr Sory pointed out, and maintained that the police could have done a better and more professional job.
Counsel argued that the action of the police “gives us the impression that there is more to it than a desire to do justice”.
He further stated that the Attorney-General was currently before the courts contending that the state owed Woyome no liability and for that reason whatever his client was alleged to have jointly or severally done did not incur any liability.
Mr Sory said his client had vehemently denied any wrongdoing and was prepared to clear his name.
He also found it most unfortunate the refusal of the police to grant his client bail on Sunday, especially when Mr Amoah had all along declared his intention to fully co-operate with investigations.
Mr Amoah was Deputy Sports Minister in the erstwhile Kufuor administration when contracts awarded for the construction of stadia ahead of the CAN 2008 tournament were cancelled and re-awarded.
Mr Amoah was reported to have instructed the construction firm Waterville Holdings to move to site ahead of a formal contract for the rehabilitation of the Accra, Kumasi and El-Wak Sports stadia for CAN 2008.
A memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Waterville and the Government of Ghana formed the basis for his letter.
An interim report by EOCO said: “Mr O.B. Amoah was the Deputy Minister who gave the green light for Waterville to proceed to site and start work at the time the contract had not been approved by Parliament.”
A former Deputy Minister of Education and Sports in the Kufuor administration, Mr O.B. Amoah, was yesterday charged with two counts of corruption and willfully causing financial loss to the state.
That was after he had been arrested on Sunday night in connection with the payment of the GH¢51.2 million judgement debt to Alfred Agbesi Woyome, a businessman.
He was released on bail in the sum of GH¢20 million with two sureties.
He is the fifth person to be picked up, aside from Woyome, who allegedly made false claims to receive GH¢51.2 million in judgement debt; Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, a Chief State Attorney, Mr Paul Asimenu, the Director of Legal Services at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, and Mrs Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, Nerquaye-Tetteh’s.
As soon as Mr Amoah was released about 4.15 p.m, a large crowd of New Patriotic Party (NPP) faithful, family members and sympathisers surged forward to carry him shoulder high amid excitement and jubilation.
Earlier in the morning, NPP heavyweights, including the Minority Leader in Parliament, Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu; the General Secretary, Kwadwo Owusu-Afriyie, aka Sir John, several Members of Parliament, family members, friends and sympathisers besieged the premises of the Police Headquarters to give Mr Amoah moral support.
The National Youth Organiser of the NPP, Mr Anthony Karbo, expressed concern over the mode of Mr Amoah’s arrest, saying the police did not obtain explicit permission from the Speaker of Parliament to release Mr Amoah to them, as the law prescribed.
He said the NPP, as a party, was not against individuals being invited to help in investigations but maintained that due process must be followed.
Mr Thaddeus Sory, who was at the CID offices before 9 a.m. to secure bail for Mr Amoah, took a swipe at the police for attempting to humiliate and intimidate his client.
He accused the police, who had picked up his client from his home between 8 p.m. and 9 p.m., of mischief and maintained that “they could have acted more professionally”.
He said his client had denied any wrongdoing and submitted a written statement to the police.
Mr Sory was particularly disappointed at the failure of the police to reply to a letter he had written on February 15, 2012, in which he had indicated his client’s willingness to assist in investigations with regard to the payment of the GH¢51.2 million to Woyome, who is currently standing trial for fraud.
In the said letter, counsel said, he had indicated to the police to state the venue, date and time for his client to report and submit a written statement on what is now known as the Woyome saga.
“Rather than reply our letter, which clearly stated our intention and willingness to co-operate with investigations, they resorted to taking him off guard by effecting his arrest on a Sunday night,” counsel blurted.
“We find it strange that on a Sunday night, without any prior request that he should make himself available to assist in investigations, you go and effect his arrest,” Mr Sory pointed out, and maintained that the police could have done a better and more professional job.
Counsel argued that the action of the police “gives us the impression that there is more to it than a desire to do justice”.
He further stated that the Attorney-General was currently before the courts contending that the state owed Woyome no liability and for that reason whatever his client was alleged to have jointly or severally done did not incur any liability.
Mr Sory said his client had vehemently denied any wrongdoing and was prepared to clear his name.
He also found it most unfortunate the refusal of the police to grant his client bail on Sunday, especially when Mr Amoah had all along declared his intention to fully co-operate with investigations.
Mr Amoah was Deputy Sports Minister in the erstwhile Kufuor administration when contracts awarded for the construction of stadia ahead of the CAN 2008 tournament were cancelled and re-awarded.
Mr Amoah was reported to have instructed the construction firm Waterville Holdings to move to site ahead of a formal contract for the rehabilitation of the Accra, Kumasi and El-Wak Sports stadia for CAN 2008.
A memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Waterville and the Government of Ghana formed the basis for his letter.
An interim report by EOCO said: “Mr O.B. Amoah was the Deputy Minister who gave the green light for Waterville to proceed to site and start work at the time the contract had not been approved by Parliament.”
Woyome released on bail
February 18, 2012 (Front page)
ALFRED Agbesi Woyome, the businessman at the centre of the GH¢51.2 million judgement debt saga, was yesterday released on bail, following his ability to meet reviewed bail conditions set out by the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court.
The bail was reviewed from GH¢54 million with two sureties to be justified to GH¢20 million with three sureties to be justified.
Woyome, according to one of his lawyers, Alhaji Musah Ahmed, got home around 6 p.m. yesterday to rejoin his family after spending 336 hours in lawful custody.
Alhaji Ahmed explained that the justification provided was more than GH¢20 million.
Counsel stated that sureties for Woyome had to go through vigorous processes of having documents tendered to be authenticated at the Lands Commission and other relevant government agencies.
He said a valuation report was produced for all the three sureties before Woyome was allowed to go home.
Woyome has been in custody since February 3, 2012 after he was picked up by armed security men in traffic around 1 p.m. for questioning on the circumstances leading to the award of GH¢51.2 million judgement debt to him.
He was remanded on February 6, 2012 and granted bail in the sum of GH¢54 million with two sureties to be justified on February 13, 2012 but he could not meet the bail terms.
Following that, his lawyers applied for a review of the bail.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, reviewed the bail conditions after two lawyers had assisted one of Woyome’s lawyers, Mr Robertson Kpatsa, to submit the application for variation of the earlier bail.
At the court’s sitting on Thursday, Mr Addo Atuah and Mr Yonny Kulendi, lawyers for Nerquaye-Tetteh and his wife and Asimenu, had put up lucid and compelling arguments which convinced the trial judge to reduce the GH¢54 million with two sureties to be justified bail condition to GH¢20 million with three sureties to be justified.
ALFRED Agbesi Woyome, the businessman at the centre of the GH¢51.2 million judgement debt saga, was yesterday released on bail, following his ability to meet reviewed bail conditions set out by the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court.
The bail was reviewed from GH¢54 million with two sureties to be justified to GH¢20 million with three sureties to be justified.
Woyome, according to one of his lawyers, Alhaji Musah Ahmed, got home around 6 p.m. yesterday to rejoin his family after spending 336 hours in lawful custody.
Alhaji Ahmed explained that the justification provided was more than GH¢20 million.
Counsel stated that sureties for Woyome had to go through vigorous processes of having documents tendered to be authenticated at the Lands Commission and other relevant government agencies.
He said a valuation report was produced for all the three sureties before Woyome was allowed to go home.
Woyome has been in custody since February 3, 2012 after he was picked up by armed security men in traffic around 1 p.m. for questioning on the circumstances leading to the award of GH¢51.2 million judgement debt to him.
He was remanded on February 6, 2012 and granted bail in the sum of GH¢54 million with two sureties to be justified on February 13, 2012 but he could not meet the bail terms.
Following that, his lawyers applied for a review of the bail.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, reviewed the bail conditions after two lawyers had assisted one of Woyome’s lawyers, Mr Robertson Kpatsa, to submit the application for variation of the earlier bail.
At the court’s sitting on Thursday, Mr Addo Atuah and Mr Yonny Kulendi, lawyers for Nerquaye-Tetteh and his wife and Asimenu, had put up lucid and compelling arguments which convinced the trial judge to reduce the GH¢54 million with two sureties to be justified bail condition to GH¢20 million with three sureties to be justified.
Woyome's bail terms reviewed
February 17, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
THE bail terms for Alfred Agbesi Woyome, the businessman who is standing trial for defrauding the state of GH¢51.2 million, have been reviewed, following the intervention of two lawyers.
Woyome, who has been in custody since February 3, 2012, is standing trial alongside Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, a Chief State Attorney; Paul Asimenu, the Director of Legal Services at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, and Mrs Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, the wife of Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh.
Mr Addo Atuah and Mr Yonny Kulendi, lawyers for Nerquaye-Tetteh and his wife and Asimenu, put up lucid and compelling arguments which convinced the trial judge, Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, to reduce the GH¢54 million with two sureties to be justified to GH¢20 million with three sureties to be justified.
Earlier attempts by counsel for Woyome, Mr Robertson Kpatsa, to convince the trial judge to reduce his client’s bail condition appeared to be falling on deaf ears, as the judge kept reminding him (counsel) that he (counsel) had earlier in the week informed the court that the defence team was prepared to satisfy “any” bail condition the court might impose.
Mr Atuah and Mr Kulendi had to step in and argue their hearts out in their bid to convince the trial judge.
The judge picked up the court’s records and quoted what could be termed as the “bragging rights” of Mr Kpatsa.
Mr Atuah told the court that Woyome’s bank accounts, as well as his assets, had been frozen by the Economic and Organised Crimes Office (EOCO).
According to counsel, who caught the court’s rapid attention with that revelation, Woyome would not abscond should the bail conditions be made flexible because all that he had worked for in all his life had been frozen and, for that reason, he would stay on and rightfully claim what he had toiled for.
Mr Atuah informed the court that Woyome had a fixed place of abode, was gainfully employed, as well as pursuing other matters at the Commercial Court to prove his innocence in the matter.
Associating himself with submissions by Mr Atuah and Kpatsa, Mr Kulendi reminded the court that Woyome did not break into the Bank of Ghana (BoG) to take the GH¢51.2 million.
He said Woyome had gone to a court of competent jurisdiction to claim what he believed to be rightfully his, adding that it was unfortunate that the Republic had misconstrued his action in court as fraud.
Mr Kulendi further argued that it was only someone who owned a company as big as Trassacco Valley who could stand surety for Woyome, adding that the grant of bail was meant to render the liberty of an accused person pending and during a trial.
Counsel submitted that Woyome had the most visible face in Ghana now and for that reason it was impossible for him to abscond.
Mr Kpatsa, who had a tough time convincing the judge, had earlier submitted that the bail term was so harsh and that his client had not been able to meet the requirements.
Mr Justice Ajet-Nasam then moved in and questioned him on whether or not he was the same person who had earlier in the week stood before his court and claimed Woyome had substantial sureties who were prepared to stand in.
Although Mr Kpatsa found it difficult to answer the judge’s questions, he made an attempt and prayed the court to review its bail condition.
A Chief State Attorney, Ms Cynthia Lamptey, opposed the defence team’s application for bail and said the bail should be commensurate with the GH¢51.2 million.
She argued that it would be paltry if the court granted Woyome bail in an amount less than GH¢51.2 million.
Ms Lamptey also submitted that Woyome’s bank accounts, and not his assets, that had been frozen, adding that Woyome could deposit his passport and yet find a way to abscond.
In his ruling, Mr Justice Ajet-Nasam said the defence and the prosecution had argued persuasively and maintained that bail should not be used as a punitive measure.
He queried what essence it would serve if the accused person was granted bail and yet could not go out to meet his lawyers to prepare his defence.
He, accordingly, reviewed the bail and directed Woyome to report himself twice a week to the police.
Hearing continues on Monday, February 20, 2012.
THE bail terms for Alfred Agbesi Woyome, the businessman who is standing trial for defrauding the state of GH¢51.2 million, have been reviewed, following the intervention of two lawyers.
Woyome, who has been in custody since February 3, 2012, is standing trial alongside Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, a Chief State Attorney; Paul Asimenu, the Director of Legal Services at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, and Mrs Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, the wife of Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh.
Mr Addo Atuah and Mr Yonny Kulendi, lawyers for Nerquaye-Tetteh and his wife and Asimenu, put up lucid and compelling arguments which convinced the trial judge, Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, to reduce the GH¢54 million with two sureties to be justified to GH¢20 million with three sureties to be justified.
Earlier attempts by counsel for Woyome, Mr Robertson Kpatsa, to convince the trial judge to reduce his client’s bail condition appeared to be falling on deaf ears, as the judge kept reminding him (counsel) that he (counsel) had earlier in the week informed the court that the defence team was prepared to satisfy “any” bail condition the court might impose.
Mr Atuah and Mr Kulendi had to step in and argue their hearts out in their bid to convince the trial judge.
The judge picked up the court’s records and quoted what could be termed as the “bragging rights” of Mr Kpatsa.
Mr Atuah told the court that Woyome’s bank accounts, as well as his assets, had been frozen by the Economic and Organised Crimes Office (EOCO).
According to counsel, who caught the court’s rapid attention with that revelation, Woyome would not abscond should the bail conditions be made flexible because all that he had worked for in all his life had been frozen and, for that reason, he would stay on and rightfully claim what he had toiled for.
Mr Atuah informed the court that Woyome had a fixed place of abode, was gainfully employed, as well as pursuing other matters at the Commercial Court to prove his innocence in the matter.
Associating himself with submissions by Mr Atuah and Kpatsa, Mr Kulendi reminded the court that Woyome did not break into the Bank of Ghana (BoG) to take the GH¢51.2 million.
He said Woyome had gone to a court of competent jurisdiction to claim what he believed to be rightfully his, adding that it was unfortunate that the Republic had misconstrued his action in court as fraud.
Mr Kulendi further argued that it was only someone who owned a company as big as Trassacco Valley who could stand surety for Woyome, adding that the grant of bail was meant to render the liberty of an accused person pending and during a trial.
Counsel submitted that Woyome had the most visible face in Ghana now and for that reason it was impossible for him to abscond.
Mr Kpatsa, who had a tough time convincing the judge, had earlier submitted that the bail term was so harsh and that his client had not been able to meet the requirements.
Mr Justice Ajet-Nasam then moved in and questioned him on whether or not he was the same person who had earlier in the week stood before his court and claimed Woyome had substantial sureties who were prepared to stand in.
Although Mr Kpatsa found it difficult to answer the judge’s questions, he made an attempt and prayed the court to review its bail condition.
A Chief State Attorney, Ms Cynthia Lamptey, opposed the defence team’s application for bail and said the bail should be commensurate with the GH¢51.2 million.
She argued that it would be paltry if the court granted Woyome bail in an amount less than GH¢51.2 million.
Ms Lamptey also submitted that Woyome’s bank accounts, and not his assets, that had been frozen, adding that Woyome could deposit his passport and yet find a way to abscond.
In his ruling, Mr Justice Ajet-Nasam said the defence and the prosecution had argued persuasively and maintained that bail should not be used as a punitive measure.
He queried what essence it would serve if the accused person was granted bail and yet could not go out to meet his lawyers to prepare his defence.
He, accordingly, reviewed the bail and directed Woyome to report himself twice a week to the police.
Hearing continues on Monday, February 20, 2012.
Appeal Court to decide on Osei-Adjei's case
February 16, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
THE Court of Appeal will, on April 19, 2012, decide the fate of a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Akwasi Osei-Adjei, who has appealed against the Fast Track High Court's order directing him to open his defence on charges of conspiracy and contravening the Public Procurement Act (PPA) in the importation of rice from India.
The Court of Appeal will on that day pronounce its decision as to whether or not to uphold Osei-Adjei’s appeal praying the court to reverse the lower court’s ruling or set aside part of the lower court’s ruling that he has a case to answer on two counts of conspiracy and contravening the PPA.
It fixed the date after the prosecution and defence teams had announced that they were relying on their written submissions.
Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, counsel for Osei-Adjei, however, raised a point of law and stated that the prosecution relied mostly on a repealed law to oppose his client’s appeal.
On February 25, 2011, the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court acquitted and discharged Mr Osei-Adjei on six counts of conspiracy, wilfully causing financial loss to the state, use of public office for profit and stealing.
Also acquitted was the former Managing Director of the National Investment Bank (NIB), Mr Charles Daniel Gyimah, who faced similar charges with the former minister.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice Bright Mensah, however, ordered Osei-Adjei and Gyimah to open their defence on charges of conspiracy and contravening the PPA in the importation of rice from India.
A notice of appeal filed on March 18, 2011 is also praying the Court of Appeal to stay proceedings at the Financial Court until the final determination of the appeal.
Osei-Adjei is praying the court to set aside the ruling of the lower court and give consequential orders acquitting and discharging him on the two counts.
The grounds of appeal state, among others, that the trial judge placed weight on irrelevant evidence and disregarded the overwhelming evidence of all the prosecution witnesses that there had been no use of public funds as defined by the PPA.
According to the appellant, the trial judge also disregarded the evidence of the prosecution that the NIB was not a procurement entity which was required to apply the PPA.
Meanwhile, the lower court has stayed proceedings in the substantive case.
In its ruling on a “submission of no case” filed on behalf of the accused persons, the lower court was of the view that the prosecution had failed to lead evidence to prove that Osei-Adjei and Gyimah wilfully caused financial loss to the state by allegedly acting together to steal 2,997 bags of rice valued at US$1,408,590.
It also upheld the defence team’s argument that the prosecution also failed to prove that the accused persons used public office for profit, as well as conspired to steal, but directed the two to open their defence on two counts of conspiracy and contravening the PPA.
Osei-Adjei and Gyimah have pleaded not guilty to the charges levelled against them and have been admitted to bail in the sum of GH¢200,000, with two sureties each to be justified.
The prosecution called 17 witnesses and closed its case on November 30, 2010. The trial began in October 2009.
THE Court of Appeal will, on April 19, 2012, decide the fate of a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Akwasi Osei-Adjei, who has appealed against the Fast Track High Court's order directing him to open his defence on charges of conspiracy and contravening the Public Procurement Act (PPA) in the importation of rice from India.
The Court of Appeal will on that day pronounce its decision as to whether or not to uphold Osei-Adjei’s appeal praying the court to reverse the lower court’s ruling or set aside part of the lower court’s ruling that he has a case to answer on two counts of conspiracy and contravening the PPA.
It fixed the date after the prosecution and defence teams had announced that they were relying on their written submissions.
Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, counsel for Osei-Adjei, however, raised a point of law and stated that the prosecution relied mostly on a repealed law to oppose his client’s appeal.
On February 25, 2011, the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court acquitted and discharged Mr Osei-Adjei on six counts of conspiracy, wilfully causing financial loss to the state, use of public office for profit and stealing.
Also acquitted was the former Managing Director of the National Investment Bank (NIB), Mr Charles Daniel Gyimah, who faced similar charges with the former minister.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice Bright Mensah, however, ordered Osei-Adjei and Gyimah to open their defence on charges of conspiracy and contravening the PPA in the importation of rice from India.
A notice of appeal filed on March 18, 2011 is also praying the Court of Appeal to stay proceedings at the Financial Court until the final determination of the appeal.
Osei-Adjei is praying the court to set aside the ruling of the lower court and give consequential orders acquitting and discharging him on the two counts.
The grounds of appeal state, among others, that the trial judge placed weight on irrelevant evidence and disregarded the overwhelming evidence of all the prosecution witnesses that there had been no use of public funds as defined by the PPA.
According to the appellant, the trial judge also disregarded the evidence of the prosecution that the NIB was not a procurement entity which was required to apply the PPA.
Meanwhile, the lower court has stayed proceedings in the substantive case.
In its ruling on a “submission of no case” filed on behalf of the accused persons, the lower court was of the view that the prosecution had failed to lead evidence to prove that Osei-Adjei and Gyimah wilfully caused financial loss to the state by allegedly acting together to steal 2,997 bags of rice valued at US$1,408,590.
It also upheld the defence team’s argument that the prosecution also failed to prove that the accused persons used public office for profit, as well as conspired to steal, but directed the two to open their defence on two counts of conspiracy and contravening the PPA.
Osei-Adjei and Gyimah have pleaded not guilty to the charges levelled against them and have been admitted to bail in the sum of GH¢200,000, with two sureties each to be justified.
The prosecution called 17 witnesses and closed its case on November 30, 2010. The trial began in October 2009.
Woyome granted bail
February 14, 2012 (Front page)
THERE was spontaneous jubilation at the premises of the Fast Track High Court when a beleaguered businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, who is standing trial for defrauding the state to the tune of GHC51.2 million was granted bail.
The crowd, most of whom wore t-shirts with the inscription “Free Woyome – God rules in the affairs of men” had sang war songs amidst loud drumming a week earlier but today cheered and danced immediately news trickled in that Woyome had been granted bail in the sum of GHC54 million with two sureties, one to be justified.
Some women removed their clothes and laid them on the ground for Woyome to walk on when he was led out of the courtroom to a waiting vehicle with registration number UE 970 U.
Taking in and enjoying the royalty treatment, Woyome waved at the crowd who told him to be bold. He also shook hands with those who dared to force their way through the thick security which had surrounded him.
Armed policemen made it virtually impossible for photojournalists to take pictures of Woyome, who waved at the crowd. Woyome, from all indications did not mind being photographed but the armed men sandwiched him and covered his face anytime a photojournalist made an attempt to take pictures.
Inside the courtroom, Woyome, who is perceived to be a financier of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), nodded his head and kept a muted smile when a Chief State Attorney, Ms. Cynthia Lamptey, indicated that the prosecution was not opposed to bail for him and his alleged accomplices.
He is standing trial with a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, the Director of Legal Services at the MOFEP, Paul Asemani and Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, wife of Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh into whose account Woyome deposited GHC400,000.
Woyome is alleged to have put in false claims to defraud the state to the tune of GHC51.2 million with the active connivance and assistance of Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asemani. The three were remanded on February 6, 2012 but were granted bail when they appeared before the court today.
Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asemani were granted bail in the sum of GHC6, 000 each with two sureties each and one each to be justified. The court, presided over by Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, ordered each of the accused persons to report twice a week to the police.
The courtroom was as usual, packed to capacity with some lawyers and reporters up on their feet. Armed men attempted to drive away reporters who were monitoring proceedings from the corridors of the courtroom but changed their stance later.
Woyome and the other accused persons, who were brought in a convoy amidst motorcade were led to the courtroom at exactly 10:10 a.m.
Treated like a high profile personality by security men, Woyome smiled and waved at the cheering crowd.
Unlike the last adjourned date when he looked pensive and moody, Woyome looked calm, collected and kept a hidden smile when the state announced that it was not opposed to bail for him and his alleged accomplices.
Spotted in a light mauve long sleeved African shirt with black embroidery, Woyome smiled and interacted with his lawyers immediately the judge retired to his chambers.
The other accused persons were quietly whisked away into a different vehicle. The crowd did not notice them worse of all cheer them.
Earlier at the court’s sitting, lawyers for the accused persons prayed the court to grant bail to their clients under favourable conditions.
Woyome, has pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretence and corrupting a public officer. Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh has also pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and corruption of public officere. Nerquaye-Tetteh’s wife also pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of crime.
Hearing continues on Monday, February 20, 2012.
END.
THERE was spontaneous jubilation at the premises of the Fast Track High Court when a beleaguered businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, who is standing trial for defrauding the state to the tune of GHC51.2 million was granted bail.
The crowd, most of whom wore t-shirts with the inscription “Free Woyome – God rules in the affairs of men” had sang war songs amidst loud drumming a week earlier but today cheered and danced immediately news trickled in that Woyome had been granted bail in the sum of GHC54 million with two sureties, one to be justified.
Some women removed their clothes and laid them on the ground for Woyome to walk on when he was led out of the courtroom to a waiting vehicle with registration number UE 970 U.
Taking in and enjoying the royalty treatment, Woyome waved at the crowd who told him to be bold. He also shook hands with those who dared to force their way through the thick security which had surrounded him.
Armed policemen made it virtually impossible for photojournalists to take pictures of Woyome, who waved at the crowd. Woyome, from all indications did not mind being photographed but the armed men sandwiched him and covered his face anytime a photojournalist made an attempt to take pictures.
Inside the courtroom, Woyome, who is perceived to be a financier of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), nodded his head and kept a muted smile when a Chief State Attorney, Ms. Cynthia Lamptey, indicated that the prosecution was not opposed to bail for him and his alleged accomplices.
He is standing trial with a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, the Director of Legal Services at the MOFEP, Paul Asemani and Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, wife of Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh into whose account Woyome deposited GHC400,000.
Woyome is alleged to have put in false claims to defraud the state to the tune of GHC51.2 million with the active connivance and assistance of Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asemani. The three were remanded on February 6, 2012 but were granted bail when they appeared before the court today.
Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asemani were granted bail in the sum of GHC6, 000 each with two sureties each and one each to be justified. The court, presided over by Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, ordered each of the accused persons to report twice a week to the police.
The courtroom was as usual, packed to capacity with some lawyers and reporters up on their feet. Armed men attempted to drive away reporters who were monitoring proceedings from the corridors of the courtroom but changed their stance later.
Woyome and the other accused persons, who were brought in a convoy amidst motorcade were led to the courtroom at exactly 10:10 a.m.
Treated like a high profile personality by security men, Woyome smiled and waved at the cheering crowd.
Unlike the last adjourned date when he looked pensive and moody, Woyome looked calm, collected and kept a hidden smile when the state announced that it was not opposed to bail for him and his alleged accomplices.
Spotted in a light mauve long sleeved African shirt with black embroidery, Woyome smiled and interacted with his lawyers immediately the judge retired to his chambers.
The other accused persons were quietly whisked away into a different vehicle. The crowd did not notice them worse of all cheer them.
Earlier at the court’s sitting, lawyers for the accused persons prayed the court to grant bail to their clients under favourable conditions.
Woyome, has pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretence and corrupting a public officer. Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh has also pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and corruption of public officere. Nerquaye-Tetteh’s wife also pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of crime.
Hearing continues on Monday, February 20, 2012.
END.
Monday, February 13, 2012
Jomoro youth protest - Over intended relocation of gas processing plant
Friday, February 10, 2012 (Page 28 Lead)
TENSION is looming in the Jomoro District of the Western Region following reports of a possible relocation of an $850 million gas processing plant from Donmunlini to Atuabo in the Ellembele District.
The youth in the area are up in arms against moves by the authorities to relocate the gas plant from Donmunlini to Atuabo and argue that the decision is premature and hasty; but the government shares a different view.
“The Board of Ghana National Gas Company is yet to take a definite position on the siting of the project but Atuabo is likely and best site for now,” said the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Ghana National Gas Company, Dr George Sipa-Adjah Yankey, in an interview with the Daily Graphic.
He said the government would consider national interest over emotional sentiments and cited the security of the plant as one of the reasons the plant needed to be sited at Atuabo.
According to him, preliminary studies conducted by Synopec, a Chinese company, indicated that the country would save millions of dollars if the plant was sited at Atuabo and not the originally designated town of Domunlinu.
The youth of Jomoro, in a strong-worded statement to traditional rulers in the Western Nzema Traditional Council, government officials and other stakeholders, have indicated their intention to move to the Castle in their numbers to protest the decision to relocate the gas processing plant.
According to the youth, farmers in the original designated area had lost large tracts of farmlands but they have not been paid any compensation.
They said it was, therefore, painful for the area to be sidelined at the last hour, especially when they had lost virtually all their farmlands; their main source of livelihood.
Reacting to their concerns, Dr Yankey denied allegations that he was one of the officials championing the relocation of the project and gave the assurance that his outfit had taken steps to compensate affected farmers.
He said the Land Valuation Board had been tasked to do crop numeration and put value on commercial trees which were felled in order to pave way for the payment of compensation to affected farmers.
He also gave the assurance that petrochemical industries would be built on the acquired land to create jobs for people in the area.
Dr Yankey said construction works on the plant which would be fed with gas from the Jubilee Oilfields are expected to be completed this year.
Currently, road survey for the laying of the onshore pipeline has been completed while engineering studies of the structure of the onshore pipeline would be completed in a couple of weeks after which pipes would be ordered.
The chief executive officer further explained that tenders had been received from prospective companies interested in manufacturing the gas processing plant and added that a company would be selected to manufacture the plant before the middle of next month.
A Deputy Minister of Energy, Mr Emmanuel Kofi-Armah Buah, who was also accused of manipulating the relocation of the project, denied any wrongdoing.
“I have no power to divert the project,” he explained and further disclosed that the Jomoro District had not been abandoned because a fertilizer plant would be set up to provide jobs for people in that area.
He said the Volta River Authority (VRA) would provide a $600 million 500 megawatts power plant at Bonyere in the Jomoro District.
TENSION is looming in the Jomoro District of the Western Region following reports of a possible relocation of an $850 million gas processing plant from Donmunlini to Atuabo in the Ellembele District.
The youth in the area are up in arms against moves by the authorities to relocate the gas plant from Donmunlini to Atuabo and argue that the decision is premature and hasty; but the government shares a different view.
“The Board of Ghana National Gas Company is yet to take a definite position on the siting of the project but Atuabo is likely and best site for now,” said the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Ghana National Gas Company, Dr George Sipa-Adjah Yankey, in an interview with the Daily Graphic.
He said the government would consider national interest over emotional sentiments and cited the security of the plant as one of the reasons the plant needed to be sited at Atuabo.
According to him, preliminary studies conducted by Synopec, a Chinese company, indicated that the country would save millions of dollars if the plant was sited at Atuabo and not the originally designated town of Domunlinu.
The youth of Jomoro, in a strong-worded statement to traditional rulers in the Western Nzema Traditional Council, government officials and other stakeholders, have indicated their intention to move to the Castle in their numbers to protest the decision to relocate the gas processing plant.
According to the youth, farmers in the original designated area had lost large tracts of farmlands but they have not been paid any compensation.
They said it was, therefore, painful for the area to be sidelined at the last hour, especially when they had lost virtually all their farmlands; their main source of livelihood.
Reacting to their concerns, Dr Yankey denied allegations that he was one of the officials championing the relocation of the project and gave the assurance that his outfit had taken steps to compensate affected farmers.
He said the Land Valuation Board had been tasked to do crop numeration and put value on commercial trees which were felled in order to pave way for the payment of compensation to affected farmers.
He also gave the assurance that petrochemical industries would be built on the acquired land to create jobs for people in the area.
Dr Yankey said construction works on the plant which would be fed with gas from the Jubilee Oilfields are expected to be completed this year.
Currently, road survey for the laying of the onshore pipeline has been completed while engineering studies of the structure of the onshore pipeline would be completed in a couple of weeks after which pipes would be ordered.
The chief executive officer further explained that tenders had been received from prospective companies interested in manufacturing the gas processing plant and added that a company would be selected to manufacture the plant before the middle of next month.
A Deputy Minister of Energy, Mr Emmanuel Kofi-Armah Buah, who was also accused of manipulating the relocation of the project, denied any wrongdoing.
“I have no power to divert the project,” he explained and further disclosed that the Jomoro District had not been abandoned because a fertilizer plant would be set up to provide jobs for people in that area.
He said the Volta River Authority (VRA) would provide a $600 million 500 megawatts power plant at Bonyere in the Jomoro District.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
POLICE TO QUIZ OSAFO-MAAFO - For his role in the Woyome saga
Wednesday, February 8, 2012 (LEAD STORY)
THE Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service has officially invited a former Minister of Finance and Economic Planning (MOFEP), Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo, to answer questions in connection with the circumstances that led to the payment of GH¢51.2 million in judgement debt to Alfred Agbesi Woyome, a businessman.
This brings to five the number of persons who have been formally invited by the CID to help the police in their investigations into the payment of the money to Woyome.
Woyome is currently on remand with a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, and the Director of Legal Services at the MOFEP, Paul Asimenu. Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, the wife of Nerquaye-Tetteh, into whose account Woyome deposited GH¢400,000, is on bail.
A sixth official, a former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, under whose tenure the judgement debt was awarded to Woyome, has also indicated her willingness to assist the CID to unravel the truth.
The CID’s invitation was extended through Mr Osafo-Maafo’s lawyer, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, on Monday to inform his client to report at the CID Headquarters at 11 a.m. yesterday.
However, the meeting could not take place because CID officials cancelled it at the last hour because of other engagements.
According to Mr Dame, “We were on our way to the CID office when, in the middle of the trip, I received a call from an official who said the meeting had been cancelled.”
An official at the CID Headquarters confirmed Mr Dame’s testimony and explained that the invitation had been cancelled at the last hour because the CID had other equally important engagements.
“We will invite him in due course,” the official said, but did not state the specific date or time for the invitation.
Mr Dame, in an interview with the Daily Graphic, said his client was waiting to receive a new date from the police.
He stated that the developments debunked claims that Mr Osafo-Maafo was evading the police.
“We are willing and prepared to assist the police to expose any wrongdoing by any public officer connected with fraudulent payments to Woyome,” Mr Dame said.
He said his client was also ready to prove that the decisive action he took in cancelling the procurement process initiated while he was in office resulted in the “state enormously saving public funds” which would have been lost.
Counsel further stated that his client should receive commendation, instead of condemnation, for acting in a way to save the state millions of dollars which would have been lost.
Woyome is standing trial at the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court for allegedly defrauding the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million.
He is alleged to have put in false claims to defraud the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million, with the active connivance and assistance of Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asimenu.
The three were remanded to reappear on February 13, 2012.
Woyome pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretences and corrupting a public officer.
Nerquaye-Tetteh was charged with two counts of conspiracy and corruption of a public officer. He pleaded not guilty to the offence, while his wife faced one count of abetment of crime.
Asimenu, on the other hand, pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of crime.
Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, who is alleged to have allowed Woyome to pay GH¢400,000 into her bank account, is currently on GH¢500,000 bail.
THE Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service has officially invited a former Minister of Finance and Economic Planning (MOFEP), Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo, to answer questions in connection with the circumstances that led to the payment of GH¢51.2 million in judgement debt to Alfred Agbesi Woyome, a businessman.
This brings to five the number of persons who have been formally invited by the CID to help the police in their investigations into the payment of the money to Woyome.
Woyome is currently on remand with a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, and the Director of Legal Services at the MOFEP, Paul Asimenu. Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, the wife of Nerquaye-Tetteh, into whose account Woyome deposited GH¢400,000, is on bail.
A sixth official, a former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, under whose tenure the judgement debt was awarded to Woyome, has also indicated her willingness to assist the CID to unravel the truth.
The CID’s invitation was extended through Mr Osafo-Maafo’s lawyer, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, on Monday to inform his client to report at the CID Headquarters at 11 a.m. yesterday.
However, the meeting could not take place because CID officials cancelled it at the last hour because of other engagements.
According to Mr Dame, “We were on our way to the CID office when, in the middle of the trip, I received a call from an official who said the meeting had been cancelled.”
An official at the CID Headquarters confirmed Mr Dame’s testimony and explained that the invitation had been cancelled at the last hour because the CID had other equally important engagements.
“We will invite him in due course,” the official said, but did not state the specific date or time for the invitation.
Mr Dame, in an interview with the Daily Graphic, said his client was waiting to receive a new date from the police.
He stated that the developments debunked claims that Mr Osafo-Maafo was evading the police.
“We are willing and prepared to assist the police to expose any wrongdoing by any public officer connected with fraudulent payments to Woyome,” Mr Dame said.
He said his client was also ready to prove that the decisive action he took in cancelling the procurement process initiated while he was in office resulted in the “state enormously saving public funds” which would have been lost.
Counsel further stated that his client should receive commendation, instead of condemnation, for acting in a way to save the state millions of dollars which would have been lost.
Woyome is standing trial at the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court for allegedly defrauding the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million.
He is alleged to have put in false claims to defraud the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million, with the active connivance and assistance of Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asimenu.
The three were remanded to reappear on February 13, 2012.
Woyome pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretences and corrupting a public officer.
Nerquaye-Tetteh was charged with two counts of conspiracy and corruption of a public officer. He pleaded not guilty to the offence, while his wife faced one count of abetment of crime.
Asimenu, on the other hand, pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of crime.
Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, who is alleged to have allowed Woyome to pay GH¢400,000 into her bank account, is currently on GH¢500,000 bail.
Woyome's case against EOCO adjourned
Wednesday, February 8, 2012 (Front Page)
THE suit instituted against the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) by a businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, over its handling of investigations into the payment of GH¢51.2 million to him has been adjourned.
The Fast Track High Court, presided over by Mr Justice K. A. Ofori-Atta, adjourned the case to February 13, 2012 to enable EOCO to serve its defence in the matter to Woyome’s lawyers.
Although EOCO has completed its investigations and indicted Woyome and some present and past government officials, the court will go ahead and hear the case on its merit.
Woyome, who is currently on remand, is questioning the mandate of EOCO to investigate the matter.
His argument is that EOCO has no mandate to investigate the judgement of a court.
He is consequently seeking an injunction to stop EOCO from continuing with the investigations, which has been completed and an interim report dated February 1, 2012 submitted to President J. E. A. Mills.
Woyome’s lawyers are also challenging EOCO’s action to freeze their client’s bank accounts.
Woyome is currently on remand with a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, and the Director of Legal Services at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, Paul Asimenu. Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, the wife of Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, into whose account Woyome deposited GH¢400,000, is on GH¢500,000 bail.
Woyome is standing trial at the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court for defrauding the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million.
He is alleged to have put in false claims to defraud the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million, with the active connivance and assistance of Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asimenu. The three were remanded to reappear on February 13, 2012.
Woyome pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretence and corrupting a public officer, while Nerquaye-Tetteh is charged with two counts of conspiracy and corruption of a public officer. He pleaded not guilty to the offence, while his wife faced one count of abetment of crime.
Asimenu, on the other hand, had pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of crime.
THE suit instituted against the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) by a businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, over its handling of investigations into the payment of GH¢51.2 million to him has been adjourned.
The Fast Track High Court, presided over by Mr Justice K. A. Ofori-Atta, adjourned the case to February 13, 2012 to enable EOCO to serve its defence in the matter to Woyome’s lawyers.
Although EOCO has completed its investigations and indicted Woyome and some present and past government officials, the court will go ahead and hear the case on its merit.
Woyome, who is currently on remand, is questioning the mandate of EOCO to investigate the matter.
His argument is that EOCO has no mandate to investigate the judgement of a court.
He is consequently seeking an injunction to stop EOCO from continuing with the investigations, which has been completed and an interim report dated February 1, 2012 submitted to President J. E. A. Mills.
Woyome’s lawyers are also challenging EOCO’s action to freeze their client’s bank accounts.
Woyome is currently on remand with a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, and the Director of Legal Services at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, Paul Asimenu. Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, the wife of Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, into whose account Woyome deposited GH¢400,000, is on GH¢500,000 bail.
Woyome is standing trial at the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court for defrauding the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million.
He is alleged to have put in false claims to defraud the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million, with the active connivance and assistance of Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asimenu. The three were remanded to reappear on February 13, 2012.
Woyome pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretence and corrupting a public officer, while Nerquaye-Tetteh is charged with two counts of conspiracy and corruption of a public officer. He pleaded not guilty to the offence, while his wife faced one count of abetment of crime.
Asimenu, on the other hand, had pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of crime.
New charges against Mawuenyegah
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 (Front page)
FRESH charges have been preferred against a Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mrs Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda, for her alleged role in 1,020 grammes of cocaine turning into sodium bicarbonate.
DSP Tehoda, who was granted bail by the Human Rights Division of the Fast Track High Court on January 30, 2012, had her freedom once again curtailed when the Accra Circuit Court remanded her in custody to reappear on February 20, 2012.
She is facing a new charge of abetment of crime, to wit, undertaking an activity relating to narcotic drugs, contrary to Section 56 (c) and 3 (2) of PNDCL 236 Narcotic Drugs (Control, Enforcement and Sanctions) Act 1990.
The particulars of offence said “between July 21, 2011 and December 13, 2011 in the Greater Accra Circuit and within the jurisdiction of this court did abet one Nana Ama Martins to swap a cocaine exhibit weighing 1,020 grammes into sodium bicarbonate”.
DSP Tehoda was initially charged with one count of abetment of crime of stealing of cocaine under Section 20 (1) of Act 29/60 and Section 56 (a) of PNDCL 236.
The Human Rights Court, in granting bail to her, said the charge was misleading because there was no law which charged individuals for “loss of cocaine”.
The prosecution, led by a Chief State Attorney, Mr Anthony Rexford Wiredu, substituted the old charge with a new one, thereby rendering her bail null and void.
DSP Tehoda, who reported to court from her home, looked bewildered when the court refused to grant her bail, although her lawyers had prayed it to grant her bail.
The facts of the case were that following the Vice-President‘s directive on December 4, 2011, the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) launched investigations into the missing cocaine which was tendered in evidence in Circuit Court One on September 27, 2011 and was admitted with objection in evidence for the court in the case involving Nana Ama Martins.
On the following day, September 28, 2011, the defence team objected to the exhibit, claiming it was not cocaine.
According to the prosecution, it would lead fresh evidence to prove that an uncle of Nana Ama Martins’s, called Yankah, and a sister of hers, Serwah Gyaabah, had told a witness in the case that they (Yankah and Serwah) managed to turn the cocaine into soda with the help of DSP Tehoda after the judge and his court clerk had refused to take GH¢4,000 and GH¢1,000, respectively, as bribe.
According to the prosecution, there was another witness to confirm the role played by DSP Tehoda and the others to turn the cocaine into sodium bicarbonate.
It further stated that DSP Tehoda assisted Nana Martins’s family to get a buyer to sell her house in order to raise GH¢10,000 to pay legal fees and other expenses. DSP Tehoda was also said to have invited Nana Martins’s lawyer to her office three times to pay off his legal fees.
The prosecution alleged that DSP Tehoda informed the lawyer that she, with the connivance of others, had managed to swap the cocaine and that at the trial he should request for a re-testing, which was done.
It said evidence would be led to show that DSP Tehoda jubilated in her office after the narcotic drug found on Nana Martins had tested positive for soda.
Mr Wiredu prayed the court to remand DSP Tehoda on the grounds that she was facing a different charge.
Counsel for DSP Tehoda, Mr E. A. Vordoagu, did not take kindly to the turn of events and said the prosecution had introduced fresh facts which did not form part of the charge sheet.
He said a close study of the recounted facts demonstrated that the prosecution was alleging that the so-called cocaine exhibit was swapped in court, adding that it was now public knowledge that the BNI report did not disclose where the swapping took place.
Counsel argued that the charge preferred against his client would fail due to doubts created, adding that “the facts cannot be substantiated in material aspect. The facts are all hearsay”.
He further argued that the charge sheet was an afterthought just to scuttle the bail that had been granted, adding, “The prosecution is desperate and bent on persecuting the DSP.”
He described the prosecution’s action as “malicious” and accordingly prayed the court to grant his client bail.
However, the trial judge, Ms Audrey Korcuvie-Tay, said DSP Tehoda’s offence was narcotic related and for that reason her hands were tied by the law.
She, accordingly, refused her bail and remanded her to reappear February 20, 2012.
FRESH charges have been preferred against a Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mrs Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda, for her alleged role in 1,020 grammes of cocaine turning into sodium bicarbonate.
DSP Tehoda, who was granted bail by the Human Rights Division of the Fast Track High Court on January 30, 2012, had her freedom once again curtailed when the Accra Circuit Court remanded her in custody to reappear on February 20, 2012.
She is facing a new charge of abetment of crime, to wit, undertaking an activity relating to narcotic drugs, contrary to Section 56 (c) and 3 (2) of PNDCL 236 Narcotic Drugs (Control, Enforcement and Sanctions) Act 1990.
The particulars of offence said “between July 21, 2011 and December 13, 2011 in the Greater Accra Circuit and within the jurisdiction of this court did abet one Nana Ama Martins to swap a cocaine exhibit weighing 1,020 grammes into sodium bicarbonate”.
DSP Tehoda was initially charged with one count of abetment of crime of stealing of cocaine under Section 20 (1) of Act 29/60 and Section 56 (a) of PNDCL 236.
The Human Rights Court, in granting bail to her, said the charge was misleading because there was no law which charged individuals for “loss of cocaine”.
The prosecution, led by a Chief State Attorney, Mr Anthony Rexford Wiredu, substituted the old charge with a new one, thereby rendering her bail null and void.
DSP Tehoda, who reported to court from her home, looked bewildered when the court refused to grant her bail, although her lawyers had prayed it to grant her bail.
The facts of the case were that following the Vice-President‘s directive on December 4, 2011, the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) launched investigations into the missing cocaine which was tendered in evidence in Circuit Court One on September 27, 2011 and was admitted with objection in evidence for the court in the case involving Nana Ama Martins.
On the following day, September 28, 2011, the defence team objected to the exhibit, claiming it was not cocaine.
According to the prosecution, it would lead fresh evidence to prove that an uncle of Nana Ama Martins’s, called Yankah, and a sister of hers, Serwah Gyaabah, had told a witness in the case that they (Yankah and Serwah) managed to turn the cocaine into soda with the help of DSP Tehoda after the judge and his court clerk had refused to take GH¢4,000 and GH¢1,000, respectively, as bribe.
According to the prosecution, there was another witness to confirm the role played by DSP Tehoda and the others to turn the cocaine into sodium bicarbonate.
It further stated that DSP Tehoda assisted Nana Martins’s family to get a buyer to sell her house in order to raise GH¢10,000 to pay legal fees and other expenses. DSP Tehoda was also said to have invited Nana Martins’s lawyer to her office three times to pay off his legal fees.
The prosecution alleged that DSP Tehoda informed the lawyer that she, with the connivance of others, had managed to swap the cocaine and that at the trial he should request for a re-testing, which was done.
It said evidence would be led to show that DSP Tehoda jubilated in her office after the narcotic drug found on Nana Martins had tested positive for soda.
Mr Wiredu prayed the court to remand DSP Tehoda on the grounds that she was facing a different charge.
Counsel for DSP Tehoda, Mr E. A. Vordoagu, did not take kindly to the turn of events and said the prosecution had introduced fresh facts which did not form part of the charge sheet.
He said a close study of the recounted facts demonstrated that the prosecution was alleging that the so-called cocaine exhibit was swapped in court, adding that it was now public knowledge that the BNI report did not disclose where the swapping took place.
Counsel argued that the charge preferred against his client would fail due to doubts created, adding that “the facts cannot be substantiated in material aspect. The facts are all hearsay”.
He further argued that the charge sheet was an afterthought just to scuttle the bail that had been granted, adding, “The prosecution is desperate and bent on persecuting the DSP.”
He described the prosecution’s action as “malicious” and accordingly prayed the court to grant his client bail.
However, the trial judge, Ms Audrey Korcuvie-Tay, said DSP Tehoda’s offence was narcotic related and for that reason her hands were tied by the law.
She, accordingly, refused her bail and remanded her to reappear February 20, 2012.
COURT REMANDS WOYOME - And 2 others for defrauding the State
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 (Lead story)
THE Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court on Monday, February 6, 2012 defied loud drum beats and war songs and remanded into police custody Alfred Agbesi Woyome and two others for allegedly defrauding the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million.
The two are a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, and the Director of Legal Services, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MOFEP), Paul Asimenu.
A third accused person, Mr Nerquaye-Tetteh’s wife, Mrs Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, into whose account Woyome paid GH¢400,000, was granted bail in the sum of GH¢500,000 with two sureties. She was also ordered to report herself to the police twice a week.
,The trial judge, Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, ignored the loud drumming, singing of war songs and hurling of curses which filtered into his courtroom and refused a bail application from lawyers for the accused persons.
Woyome, who looked pensive and sober, intermittently shook his head while he was in the dock. He also tapped his feet, as if to ward off stress, while he was on his feet with the others for almost two hours.
A large crowd besieged the court premises and chanted war songs, with the belief that that conduct might save Woyome, but on hearing that Woyome had been remanded, the noise ended immediately.
Woyome, who wore a white linen shirt with black and white embroidery, was remanded together with Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asimenu to reappear on February 13, 2012.
Woyome, who has been in the news for the wrong reasons, pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretence and corrupting a public officer.
Nerquaye-Tetteh was charged with two counts of conspiracy and corruption of a public officer. He pleaded not guilty to the offence, while his wife faced one count of abetment of crime.
Asimenu, on the other hand, pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of crime.
Armed policemen sent the four accused persons to the packed courtroom at 2.02 p.m. to face the charges. Immediately they entered, a thick crowd outside began beating drums and sang on top of their voices. They were virtually screaming as if they intended to abruptly end proceedings with their noise.
However, their noise-making gradually subdued as hearing progressed. A thick crowd also gathered outside the court premises, as passers-by stopped to catch a glimpse of Woyome.
At exactly 3:27 p.m., 17 minutes after court proceedings had ended, armed policemen led the accused persons out of the courtroom. Photojournalists found it difficult to take photographs of the accused persons as policemen virtually made it impossible for them to do so.
The four, who were treated like high-profile dignitaries, were whisked away in waiting vehicles, amidst the sounding of sirens.
Earlier, a Chief State Attorney, Ms Cynthia Lamptey, had prayed the court to remand the accused because investigations were ongoing to unravel what led to the GH¢51.2 million fraud.
Presenting the facts of the case, Ms Lamptey informed the court that in 2009 Woyome made false representation to the then Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, stating that he had a contract with the government of Ghana regarding the construction of sports stadia for CAN 2008 but that the contract had unlawfully been abrogated.
According to the prosecution, Woyome subsequently filed a writ at the High Court, claiming he was owed GH¢41 million and interest of GH¢10.2 million, bringing the total to GH¢51.2 million.
The prosecution said moneys paid were GH¢17.9 million in February 2010, GH¢10 million on January 27, 2011, GH¢10 million on April 18, 2011 and GH¢14.1 million on September 12, 2011
It said investigations showed that the government did not owe Woyome any money, while Nerquaye-Tetteh failed to go to court to defend the action Woyome had instituted against the state.
It further pointed out that Woyome transferred GH¢400,000 into Mrs Nerquaye-Tetteh’s account. Investigations also revealed that as a director of Legal Services, Asimenu had written opinions and quoted wrong figures, as well as given information, which created conditions for Woyome to be paid money which was not due him (Woyome).
Applying for bail, Mr Robertson Kpatsa, counsel for Woyome, said the facts presented by the prosecution were not entirely true.
He argued that the money paid to Woyome was the result of a judgement debt he had obtained from a court of competent jurisdiction.
Mr Kpatsa said his client would defend himself to prove his innocence and prayed the court to grant his client bail because he was a Ghanaian businessman and had families in Ghana.
According to counsel, Woyome had substantial and credible sureties who would stand in for him when granted bail.
For his part, counsel for Nerquaye-Tetteh and his wife, Mr Addo Atuah, prayed the court to grant his clients bail with the reason that what the prosecution had said was grossly at variance with what had happened.
Mr Atuah informed the court that Mrs Nerquaye-Tetteh was a nursing mother who had been granted police enquiry bail and, accordingly, prayed the court to grant her bail, since she would co-operate with the police.
He also argued that it was not Nerquaye-Tetteh’s fault that the state lost the case which had led to Woyome being granted judgement debt.
Counsel for Asimenu, Mr Kwame Akuffo, argued that holding an opinion was not ground enough for criminal indictment in reference to the state’s argument that Asimenu had written opinions which served as grounds for Woyome to defraud the state.
THE Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court on Monday, February 6, 2012 defied loud drum beats and war songs and remanded into police custody Alfred Agbesi Woyome and two others for allegedly defrauding the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million.
The two are a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, and the Director of Legal Services, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MOFEP), Paul Asimenu.
A third accused person, Mr Nerquaye-Tetteh’s wife, Mrs Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, into whose account Woyome paid GH¢400,000, was granted bail in the sum of GH¢500,000 with two sureties. She was also ordered to report herself to the police twice a week.
,The trial judge, Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, ignored the loud drumming, singing of war songs and hurling of curses which filtered into his courtroom and refused a bail application from lawyers for the accused persons.
Woyome, who looked pensive and sober, intermittently shook his head while he was in the dock. He also tapped his feet, as if to ward off stress, while he was on his feet with the others for almost two hours.
A large crowd besieged the court premises and chanted war songs, with the belief that that conduct might save Woyome, but on hearing that Woyome had been remanded, the noise ended immediately.
Woyome, who wore a white linen shirt with black and white embroidery, was remanded together with Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asimenu to reappear on February 13, 2012.
Woyome, who has been in the news for the wrong reasons, pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretence and corrupting a public officer.
Nerquaye-Tetteh was charged with two counts of conspiracy and corruption of a public officer. He pleaded not guilty to the offence, while his wife faced one count of abetment of crime.
Asimenu, on the other hand, pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of crime.
Armed policemen sent the four accused persons to the packed courtroom at 2.02 p.m. to face the charges. Immediately they entered, a thick crowd outside began beating drums and sang on top of their voices. They were virtually screaming as if they intended to abruptly end proceedings with their noise.
However, their noise-making gradually subdued as hearing progressed. A thick crowd also gathered outside the court premises, as passers-by stopped to catch a glimpse of Woyome.
At exactly 3:27 p.m., 17 minutes after court proceedings had ended, armed policemen led the accused persons out of the courtroom. Photojournalists found it difficult to take photographs of the accused persons as policemen virtually made it impossible for them to do so.
The four, who were treated like high-profile dignitaries, were whisked away in waiting vehicles, amidst the sounding of sirens.
Earlier, a Chief State Attorney, Ms Cynthia Lamptey, had prayed the court to remand the accused because investigations were ongoing to unravel what led to the GH¢51.2 million fraud.
Presenting the facts of the case, Ms Lamptey informed the court that in 2009 Woyome made false representation to the then Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, stating that he had a contract with the government of Ghana regarding the construction of sports stadia for CAN 2008 but that the contract had unlawfully been abrogated.
According to the prosecution, Woyome subsequently filed a writ at the High Court, claiming he was owed GH¢41 million and interest of GH¢10.2 million, bringing the total to GH¢51.2 million.
The prosecution said moneys paid were GH¢17.9 million in February 2010, GH¢10 million on January 27, 2011, GH¢10 million on April 18, 2011 and GH¢14.1 million on September 12, 2011
It said investigations showed that the government did not owe Woyome any money, while Nerquaye-Tetteh failed to go to court to defend the action Woyome had instituted against the state.
It further pointed out that Woyome transferred GH¢400,000 into Mrs Nerquaye-Tetteh’s account. Investigations also revealed that as a director of Legal Services, Asimenu had written opinions and quoted wrong figures, as well as given information, which created conditions for Woyome to be paid money which was not due him (Woyome).
Applying for bail, Mr Robertson Kpatsa, counsel for Woyome, said the facts presented by the prosecution were not entirely true.
He argued that the money paid to Woyome was the result of a judgement debt he had obtained from a court of competent jurisdiction.
Mr Kpatsa said his client would defend himself to prove his innocence and prayed the court to grant his client bail because he was a Ghanaian businessman and had families in Ghana.
According to counsel, Woyome had substantial and credible sureties who would stand in for him when granted bail.
For his part, counsel for Nerquaye-Tetteh and his wife, Mr Addo Atuah, prayed the court to grant his clients bail with the reason that what the prosecution had said was grossly at variance with what had happened.
Mr Atuah informed the court that Mrs Nerquaye-Tetteh was a nursing mother who had been granted police enquiry bail and, accordingly, prayed the court to grant her bail, since she would co-operate with the police.
He also argued that it was not Nerquaye-Tetteh’s fault that the state lost the case which had led to Woyome being granted judgement debt.
Counsel for Asimenu, Mr Kwame Akuffo, argued that holding an opinion was not ground enough for criminal indictment in reference to the state’s argument that Asimenu had written opinions which served as grounds for Woyome to defraud the state.
WOYOME IS HOT - In police grip for questioning
Saturday, February 4, 2012 (Lead Story)
A businessman, Mr Alfred Agbesi Woyome, was On Friday, February 3, 2012, arrested by the police for questioning in connection with his alleged receipt of GH¢51.2 million judgement debt by fraudulent means.
His arrest, according to a Deputy Minister of Information, Mr Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, followed a directive by President John Evans Atta Mills as part of a series of actions to deal with the Woyome judgement debt saga.
The interim report released by the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) on Thursday concluded that Mr Woyome was not entitled to the GH¢51,283,480.59 that had been paid to him by the government for the abrogation of contracts in respect of the construction of stadia for the 2008 Africa Cup of Nations (CAN 2008).
It said Mr Woyome manipulated documents and information, and riding on the negligence and/or complicity of public officials, managed to receive money which he was clearly not entitled to.
Barely 24 hours after the report was made public, sources said Woyome was picked up for questioning by armed policemen in traffic around 1 p.m.
The Head of Operations at the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service, Chief Superintendent Frank Kwofie, confirmed Mr Woyome's arrest.
He said it was true that Woyome had been picked up for questioning but declined to give further details. He also declined to say whether or not other persons implicated in the EOCO report would be picked up for questioning.
Mr Woyome’s lawyers were frantically trying to secure bail for him as of 6 p.m.
The entrance to the Police Headquarters was a silent statement of a “no-go area”, as armoured vehicles blocked the place, while scores of armed policemen in helmet patrolled the pavements near the headquarters.
Another group of armed men was spotted sitting in an armoured vehicle, while reporters and members of the public were refused entry to the premises which, until 1 p.m. yesterday, had been opened to the public.
Armed men kept an eye on reporters who had earlier been politely turned away. Only the lawyers for Woyome were allowed entry.
The National Chairman of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), Dr Kwabena Adjei, was spotted entering the Police Headquarters in a Toyota Land Cruiser at 3.44 p.m.
Some Woyome sympathisers expressed disappointment at his arrest.
Asked why they were there, they said they had gathered to give moral support to the businessman.
Passers-by looked towards the Police Headquarters as if it was possible to catch a glimpse of Mr Woyome.
A taxi driver loudly informed a colleague driver who was driving in the opposite direction that he had heard Woyome was in the police building for fraud.
Vehicles were searched and drivers interviewed before they were allowed entry onto the premises. Others were turned away.
Scores of Woyome sympathisers who had earlier trooped to the Police Headquarters to demand his release were thrown out.
A crowd gathered at a nearby bus stop and waited for new developments. They stood at bay to avoid being picked by the police who had earlier arrested a few people who had thronged the Police Headquarters a few minutes after Mr Woyome had been picked up.
A businessman, Mr Alfred Agbesi Woyome, was On Friday, February 3, 2012, arrested by the police for questioning in connection with his alleged receipt of GH¢51.2 million judgement debt by fraudulent means.
His arrest, according to a Deputy Minister of Information, Mr Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, followed a directive by President John Evans Atta Mills as part of a series of actions to deal with the Woyome judgement debt saga.
The interim report released by the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) on Thursday concluded that Mr Woyome was not entitled to the GH¢51,283,480.59 that had been paid to him by the government for the abrogation of contracts in respect of the construction of stadia for the 2008 Africa Cup of Nations (CAN 2008).
It said Mr Woyome manipulated documents and information, and riding on the negligence and/or complicity of public officials, managed to receive money which he was clearly not entitled to.
Barely 24 hours after the report was made public, sources said Woyome was picked up for questioning by armed policemen in traffic around 1 p.m.
The Head of Operations at the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service, Chief Superintendent Frank Kwofie, confirmed Mr Woyome's arrest.
He said it was true that Woyome had been picked up for questioning but declined to give further details. He also declined to say whether or not other persons implicated in the EOCO report would be picked up for questioning.
Mr Woyome’s lawyers were frantically trying to secure bail for him as of 6 p.m.
The entrance to the Police Headquarters was a silent statement of a “no-go area”, as armoured vehicles blocked the place, while scores of armed policemen in helmet patrolled the pavements near the headquarters.
Another group of armed men was spotted sitting in an armoured vehicle, while reporters and members of the public were refused entry to the premises which, until 1 p.m. yesterday, had been opened to the public.
Armed men kept an eye on reporters who had earlier been politely turned away. Only the lawyers for Woyome were allowed entry.
The National Chairman of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), Dr Kwabena Adjei, was spotted entering the Police Headquarters in a Toyota Land Cruiser at 3.44 p.m.
Some Woyome sympathisers expressed disappointment at his arrest.
Asked why they were there, they said they had gathered to give moral support to the businessman.
Passers-by looked towards the Police Headquarters as if it was possible to catch a glimpse of Mr Woyome.
A taxi driver loudly informed a colleague driver who was driving in the opposite direction that he had heard Woyome was in the police building for fraud.
Vehicles were searched and drivers interviewed before they were allowed entry onto the premises. Others were turned away.
Scores of Woyome sympathisers who had earlier trooped to the Police Headquarters to demand his release were thrown out.
A crowd gathered at a nearby bus stop and waited for new developments. They stood at bay to avoid being picked by the police who had earlier arrested a few people who had thronged the Police Headquarters a few minutes after Mr Woyome had been picked up.
DSP Mawuenyegah"s trial - A-G BUNGLES CASE
February 1, 2012 (Lead Story)
THE Human Rights Division of the Fast Track High Court on January 31, 2012 granted bail to Deputy Superintendent of Police Mrs Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda on the grounds that the charge against her was flawed.
According to the Presiding Judge, Mr Justice Kofi Essel-Mensah, “the particulars of offence accompanying the statement of offence are alien to the law and I, therefore, do not see why her rights must be curtailed”.
Ignoring an earlier move by the prosecution to introduce fresh evidence to convince the court to refuse Mrs Tehoda bail, the judge upheld a bail application from counsel for Mrs Tehoda and granted her bail in the sum of GH¢100,000, with two sureties.
Counsel for Mrs Tehoda, Mr E. A.Vordoagu, had prayed the court to grant his client bail because the charge preferred against her was incompetent, vexatious and without merit.
After standing the case down for three hours to enable the prosecution to file its affidavit in opposition to the defence team’s bail application, a Chief State Attorney, Mr Rexford Wiredu, emerged, accusing Mrs Tehoda’s husband and her uncle, who is also a policeman, of using crude methods to secure her release.
Those allegations did not deter the judge from scrutinising the charge sheet and the particulars of offence, which eventually led to the granting of bail to the accused person.
Mrs Tehoda, who is at the centre of the cocaine-turn-sodium carbonate saga, has been charged with one count of abetment of stealing cocaine under Section 20 (1) of Act 29/60 and Section 56 (a) of the Narcotic Drugs (Control, Enforcement and Sanctions) Act 1990, PNDCL 236.
But the particulars of offence stated, “Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda, Police Officer, between 21st July, 2011 and December 2011 in the Greater Accra Circuit and within the jurisdiction of this court did aid and abet one Nana Ama Martins’ families and other individuals to commit crime, to wit loss of cocaine exhibit.”
That, according to the judge, was misleading, because there was no law which charged individuals for “loss of cocaine”.
He, therefore, held that holding the accused person for abetting crime was misleading and for that reason the court would uphold her human rights and admit her to bail.
Mr Justice Essel-Mensah admitted that although the case was a simple legal matter, it had become topical and sensational and for that reason the court would be very careful in giving its ruling.
The first question the judge posed was: “Has the applicant (Mrs Tehoda) been charged with any narcotic offence?”, to which he (judge) answered that the charge sheet bore no reference to that.
He then argued that although the prosecution had said she had abetted crime by stealing cocaine, the same charge sheet explained that she had contributed to the loss of cocaine exhibit.
The court held that the Criminal and other Offences Act had not enacted such a law.
Based on those inconsistencies and ambiguities in the charge sheet, it held that Mrs Tehoda could not be held any longer in detention.
Contrary to a court order on Tuesday, January 30, 2012 that they should produce the accused person, BNI officials failed to do so, but Mrs Tehoda’s husband and her family members expressed open joy after the court’s ruling yesterday.
They congratulated the defence lawyers, Mr E. A. Vordoagu and Mr Oliver Dzeble, for securing the freedom of their relative.
Mr Vordoagu had argued that the prosecution lumped the charge sheet together, thereby rendering it either mischievous or incompetent.
He further argued that the prosecution was seeking to misdirect the law and stated that the charge preferred against his client was bailable.
According to him, Mrs Tehoda had been kept in custody since December 29, 2011 on flawed charges.
“You do not arrest a person only to fish for evidence to incriminate her. This is dangerous practice and I pray the court to admit her to bail on flexible terms,” he said.
He assured the court that Mrs Tehoda would comply with the court’s orders when granted bail.
Responding, Mr Wiredu pointed out that the accused person was lawfully charged and denied an assertion that defence lawyers had been denied access to her.
Mr Wiredu informed the court that the sister of Nana Martins, the lady who was said to have possessed the cocaine which turned to washing soda, had been directed by Mrs Tehoda’s husband not to co-operate with the police.
He said he had evidence to prove that Mrs Tehoda’s uncle, a sergeant in the Ghana Police Service, was scheming with Mr Tehoda and Nana Martins’s sister to secure Mrs Tehoda’s release.
According to the Chief State Attorney, the three persons were working “furiously to interfere in the process” and for that reason it would be dangerous to grant the accused person bail.
He, therefore, prayed the court to take the seriousness of the offence, as well as accompanying punishment, into consideration and refuse the accused person bail.
Mrs Tehoda had, on January 17, 2012, pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of stealing of cocaine and was remanded by the Circuit Court to reappear on February 6, 2012.
The police handed the accused person over to the BNI on December 29, 2011 on suspicious dealings with Nana Martins after she (Nana Martins) had been rearrested in July 2011.
Nana Martins was acquitted and discharged by the Accra Circuit Court of the charge of possessing cocaine in the trial which was aborted after the court had upheld a submission of ‘no case’ made by her counsel.
BNI Investigations led to the arrest of Mrs Tehoda for her alleged role in the swapping of the cocaine.
The prosecution said investigations were still ongoing to identify Mrs Tehoda’s collaborators.
THE Human Rights Division of the Fast Track High Court on January 31, 2012 granted bail to Deputy Superintendent of Police Mrs Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda on the grounds that the charge against her was flawed.
According to the Presiding Judge, Mr Justice Kofi Essel-Mensah, “the particulars of offence accompanying the statement of offence are alien to the law and I, therefore, do not see why her rights must be curtailed”.
Ignoring an earlier move by the prosecution to introduce fresh evidence to convince the court to refuse Mrs Tehoda bail, the judge upheld a bail application from counsel for Mrs Tehoda and granted her bail in the sum of GH¢100,000, with two sureties.
Counsel for Mrs Tehoda, Mr E. A.Vordoagu, had prayed the court to grant his client bail because the charge preferred against her was incompetent, vexatious and without merit.
After standing the case down for three hours to enable the prosecution to file its affidavit in opposition to the defence team’s bail application, a Chief State Attorney, Mr Rexford Wiredu, emerged, accusing Mrs Tehoda’s husband and her uncle, who is also a policeman, of using crude methods to secure her release.
Those allegations did not deter the judge from scrutinising the charge sheet and the particulars of offence, which eventually led to the granting of bail to the accused person.
Mrs Tehoda, who is at the centre of the cocaine-turn-sodium carbonate saga, has been charged with one count of abetment of stealing cocaine under Section 20 (1) of Act 29/60 and Section 56 (a) of the Narcotic Drugs (Control, Enforcement and Sanctions) Act 1990, PNDCL 236.
But the particulars of offence stated, “Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda, Police Officer, between 21st July, 2011 and December 2011 in the Greater Accra Circuit and within the jurisdiction of this court did aid and abet one Nana Ama Martins’ families and other individuals to commit crime, to wit loss of cocaine exhibit.”
That, according to the judge, was misleading, because there was no law which charged individuals for “loss of cocaine”.
He, therefore, held that holding the accused person for abetting crime was misleading and for that reason the court would uphold her human rights and admit her to bail.
Mr Justice Essel-Mensah admitted that although the case was a simple legal matter, it had become topical and sensational and for that reason the court would be very careful in giving its ruling.
The first question the judge posed was: “Has the applicant (Mrs Tehoda) been charged with any narcotic offence?”, to which he (judge) answered that the charge sheet bore no reference to that.
He then argued that although the prosecution had said she had abetted crime by stealing cocaine, the same charge sheet explained that she had contributed to the loss of cocaine exhibit.
The court held that the Criminal and other Offences Act had not enacted such a law.
Based on those inconsistencies and ambiguities in the charge sheet, it held that Mrs Tehoda could not be held any longer in detention.
Contrary to a court order on Tuesday, January 30, 2012 that they should produce the accused person, BNI officials failed to do so, but Mrs Tehoda’s husband and her family members expressed open joy after the court’s ruling yesterday.
They congratulated the defence lawyers, Mr E. A. Vordoagu and Mr Oliver Dzeble, for securing the freedom of their relative.
Mr Vordoagu had argued that the prosecution lumped the charge sheet together, thereby rendering it either mischievous or incompetent.
He further argued that the prosecution was seeking to misdirect the law and stated that the charge preferred against his client was bailable.
According to him, Mrs Tehoda had been kept in custody since December 29, 2011 on flawed charges.
“You do not arrest a person only to fish for evidence to incriminate her. This is dangerous practice and I pray the court to admit her to bail on flexible terms,” he said.
He assured the court that Mrs Tehoda would comply with the court’s orders when granted bail.
Responding, Mr Wiredu pointed out that the accused person was lawfully charged and denied an assertion that defence lawyers had been denied access to her.
Mr Wiredu informed the court that the sister of Nana Martins, the lady who was said to have possessed the cocaine which turned to washing soda, had been directed by Mrs Tehoda’s husband not to co-operate with the police.
He said he had evidence to prove that Mrs Tehoda’s uncle, a sergeant in the Ghana Police Service, was scheming with Mr Tehoda and Nana Martins’s sister to secure Mrs Tehoda’s release.
According to the Chief State Attorney, the three persons were working “furiously to interfere in the process” and for that reason it would be dangerous to grant the accused person bail.
He, therefore, prayed the court to take the seriousness of the offence, as well as accompanying punishment, into consideration and refuse the accused person bail.
Mrs Tehoda had, on January 17, 2012, pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of stealing of cocaine and was remanded by the Circuit Court to reappear on February 6, 2012.
The police handed the accused person over to the BNI on December 29, 2011 on suspicious dealings with Nana Martins after she (Nana Martins) had been rearrested in July 2011.
Nana Martins was acquitted and discharged by the Accra Circuit Court of the charge of possessing cocaine in the trial which was aborted after the court had upheld a submission of ‘no case’ made by her counsel.
BNI Investigations led to the arrest of Mrs Tehoda for her alleged role in the swapping of the cocaine.
The prosecution said investigations were still ongoing to identify Mrs Tehoda’s collaborators.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Supreme Court judge suggests solution to Akuse boundary dispute
A Supreme Court judge, Mr Justice William Atuguba, today suggested that the solution to the Akuse boundary dispute between the Greater Accra and Eastern Regions could be found in the examination of relevant local government legislations.
He, therefore, directed lawyers for parties in the boundary dispute at the Supreme Court to research into versions of Legislative Instrument from 1954 to date and address the court on it.
He made the suggestion when the matter was called at the court’s sitting in Accra today.
The case, which bordered on whether or not Akuse was part of the Greater Accra or Eastern Region was not heard because one of the panel members was out of the jurisdiction.
It was, therefore, adjourned to February 16, 2012.
There was heated argument between parties in the case outside the court premises after the case was adjourned. The parties, who mostly spoke in the local dialect Krobo swore to deal with each other when they reach the Akuse township.
Akuse has been at the centre of a dispute between the Dangme West District, now the Shai Osudoku District, in the Greater Accra Region and the Lower Manya Krobo District in the Eastern Region following the decision of the Parliamentary Committee on Subsidiary Legislation set up in 2010 to place the Akuse Electoral Area under the Dangme West District in the Greater Accra Region, a move which infuriated authorities and residents of the Manya Krobo Traditional Area.
Two individuals are challenging the creation and specification of the new electoral area by the Ministry of Local Government which was gazetted in November 2010.
Mr Charles Mate Kole and Nene Azago Kwesitsu I have sued the EC and the Attorney-General on the grounds that the Local Government (Creation of New District Electoral Areas and Designation of Units) Instrument, 2010 (LI 1983) sought to alter boundaries between the Greater Accra and the Eastern regions.
The two are contending that the Osukute, Bungalow, Akutua, Zongo New Town, Amedeka, Natiriku and Salon Electoral areas (previously part of the Lower Manya Krobo District in the Eastern Region, as per the specification made by CI 46 of 2004) are now part of the Dangme West District in the Greater Accra Region.
They are, accordingly, praying the court to declare that that action was in excess of the powers conferred on the Minister of Local Government by sections 3 and 4 of the Local Government Act, 1993 (Act 462).
In a writ filed on behalf of the plaintiffs by their lawyer, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, the plaintiffs are praying the Supreme Court to declare that upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 241 (2) and Article 5 of the Constitution, Parliament acted in excess of its powers by approving, adopting and enacting LI 1983.
They are also praying the highest court of the land to declare as null and void and of no legal effect LI 1983 which eventually altered the boundaries between the Greater Accra and the Eastern regions, as well as declare as null and void and of no legal effect the second column of LI 1983 which relates to the specification of the Osukute, Bungalow, Akutua, Zongo New Town, Amedeka, Natiriku and Salon Electoral areas as part of the Dangme West District.
The plaintiffs are asking for an order restraining the EC from conducting elections or unit committee elections or exercising its powers to conduct elections in the affected towns pending the hearing and final determination of the merits of the instant action, as well as any further costs the court may deem fit.
The Attorney-General has, however, denied that the Minister of Local Government embarked on an exercise to alter boundaries between the Eastern and the Greater Accra regions.
The defendant is also praying the court to take into consideration the statute and social needs of the community, the economic exigencies of time and other factors, adding, “The Osudoku people need to keep their cultural identity as one people and the law must be used in the sense to further the cause of this unity and not to disintegrate them.”
In relation to this suit, the Chief of Akuse, Nene Teye Titiriku, the Akuse and Amedeka Residents Association and six former assembly members applied to be joined to the suit but the court struck out the names of the six assembly members and, accordingly, joined the names of the two others to the suit filed by Mr Kole and Nene Kwesitsu.
In November 2010, a Parliamentary Sub-Legislating Committee, acting on the Local Government (Creation of New District Electoral Areas and Designation of Units) Instrument, 2010 (LI 1983), realigned six electoral areas — Zongo New Town, Akutua, Osukute, Bungalow, Amedeka and Salon — at Akuse, originally part of the Lower Manya Krobo District in the Eastern Region, to Dangme West in the Greater Accra Region.
He, therefore, directed lawyers for parties in the boundary dispute at the Supreme Court to research into versions of Legislative Instrument from 1954 to date and address the court on it.
He made the suggestion when the matter was called at the court’s sitting in Accra today.
The case, which bordered on whether or not Akuse was part of the Greater Accra or Eastern Region was not heard because one of the panel members was out of the jurisdiction.
It was, therefore, adjourned to February 16, 2012.
There was heated argument between parties in the case outside the court premises after the case was adjourned. The parties, who mostly spoke in the local dialect Krobo swore to deal with each other when they reach the Akuse township.
Akuse has been at the centre of a dispute between the Dangme West District, now the Shai Osudoku District, in the Greater Accra Region and the Lower Manya Krobo District in the Eastern Region following the decision of the Parliamentary Committee on Subsidiary Legislation set up in 2010 to place the Akuse Electoral Area under the Dangme West District in the Greater Accra Region, a move which infuriated authorities and residents of the Manya Krobo Traditional Area.
Two individuals are challenging the creation and specification of the new electoral area by the Ministry of Local Government which was gazetted in November 2010.
Mr Charles Mate Kole and Nene Azago Kwesitsu I have sued the EC and the Attorney-General on the grounds that the Local Government (Creation of New District Electoral Areas and Designation of Units) Instrument, 2010 (LI 1983) sought to alter boundaries between the Greater Accra and the Eastern regions.
The two are contending that the Osukute, Bungalow, Akutua, Zongo New Town, Amedeka, Natiriku and Salon Electoral areas (previously part of the Lower Manya Krobo District in the Eastern Region, as per the specification made by CI 46 of 2004) are now part of the Dangme West District in the Greater Accra Region.
They are, accordingly, praying the court to declare that that action was in excess of the powers conferred on the Minister of Local Government by sections 3 and 4 of the Local Government Act, 1993 (Act 462).
In a writ filed on behalf of the plaintiffs by their lawyer, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, the plaintiffs are praying the Supreme Court to declare that upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 241 (2) and Article 5 of the Constitution, Parliament acted in excess of its powers by approving, adopting and enacting LI 1983.
They are also praying the highest court of the land to declare as null and void and of no legal effect LI 1983 which eventually altered the boundaries between the Greater Accra and the Eastern regions, as well as declare as null and void and of no legal effect the second column of LI 1983 which relates to the specification of the Osukute, Bungalow, Akutua, Zongo New Town, Amedeka, Natiriku and Salon Electoral areas as part of the Dangme West District.
The plaintiffs are asking for an order restraining the EC from conducting elections or unit committee elections or exercising its powers to conduct elections in the affected towns pending the hearing and final determination of the merits of the instant action, as well as any further costs the court may deem fit.
The Attorney-General has, however, denied that the Minister of Local Government embarked on an exercise to alter boundaries between the Eastern and the Greater Accra regions.
The defendant is also praying the court to take into consideration the statute and social needs of the community, the economic exigencies of time and other factors, adding, “The Osudoku people need to keep their cultural identity as one people and the law must be used in the sense to further the cause of this unity and not to disintegrate them.”
In relation to this suit, the Chief of Akuse, Nene Teye Titiriku, the Akuse and Amedeka Residents Association and six former assembly members applied to be joined to the suit but the court struck out the names of the six assembly members and, accordingly, joined the names of the two others to the suit filed by Mr Kole and Nene Kwesitsu.
In November 2010, a Parliamentary Sub-Legislating Committee, acting on the Local Government (Creation of New District Electoral Areas and Designation of Units) Instrument, 2010 (LI 1983), realigned six electoral areas — Zongo New Town, Akutua, Osukute, Bungalow, Amedeka and Salon — at Akuse, originally part of the Lower Manya Krobo District in the Eastern Region, to Dangme West in the Greater Accra Region.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Supreme Court adjourns suit against Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey
THE Supreme Court could not hear a case brought against Mr Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey over his purchase of a government bungalow because the plaintiffs, Okudzeto Ablakwa and Dr Omane Boamah, were not served with hearing notices.
The court then directed its registrar to serve hearing notices on parties and accordingly adjourned the case sine die.
Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey was present in court.
In November 2011, the court dismissed Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey’s preliminary objection which argued that the court had no mandate to hear a case brought before it by the applicants in respect of his right to purchase a government bungalow.
The nine-member court, in a unanimous decision, argued that, although, the case passed for a land case, which falls within the domain of the High Court, the plaintiffs were not laying claim to the property in question but rather seeking an interpretation of several provisions of the Constitution regarding the ownership of state property, including Articles 20 (5) and 20 (6) of the 1992 Constitution.
Presided over by Mr Justice William Atuguba, the court agreed that it had jurisdiction by law and precedents to hear the case which bordered both on constitutionality and public interest.
Other members of the court were Ms Justice Sophia Akuffo, Mr Justice S. A. Brobbey, Mrs Justice Sophia Adinyira, Mrs Justice Rose Owusu, Mr Justice Jones Dotse, Mr Justice Baffoe Bonnie, Mr Justice B. T. Aryeetey and Mrs Justice Vida Akoto Bamfo.
In 2008, Mr Ablakwa and Dr. Boamah, Deputy Ministers of Information and Environment, Science and Technology respectively, brought the action against Mr Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) Chairman, who was then the Minister of Tourism and National Orientation, seeking a declaration from the court that he had no right to buy the bungalow at No 2 Mungo Street in the Ridge residential area he was occupying at the time.
The plaintiffs had argued that the action of Mr Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey contravened Articles 20 (5) and 20 (6) and smacked of cronyism and gross abuse of discretional powers of a public officer.
However, Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey raised a preliminary objection, saying the court had no mandate to hear the case.
His argument was that the right procedure was for the plaintiffs to apply to the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), if they thought he was abusing his office by applying to purchase the bungalow.
However, the Supreme Court held otherwise and accordingly dismissed the case.
The court then directed its registrar to serve hearing notices on parties and accordingly adjourned the case sine die.
Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey was present in court.
In November 2011, the court dismissed Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey’s preliminary objection which argued that the court had no mandate to hear a case brought before it by the applicants in respect of his right to purchase a government bungalow.
The nine-member court, in a unanimous decision, argued that, although, the case passed for a land case, which falls within the domain of the High Court, the plaintiffs were not laying claim to the property in question but rather seeking an interpretation of several provisions of the Constitution regarding the ownership of state property, including Articles 20 (5) and 20 (6) of the 1992 Constitution.
Presided over by Mr Justice William Atuguba, the court agreed that it had jurisdiction by law and precedents to hear the case which bordered both on constitutionality and public interest.
Other members of the court were Ms Justice Sophia Akuffo, Mr Justice S. A. Brobbey, Mrs Justice Sophia Adinyira, Mrs Justice Rose Owusu, Mr Justice Jones Dotse, Mr Justice Baffoe Bonnie, Mr Justice B. T. Aryeetey and Mrs Justice Vida Akoto Bamfo.
In 2008, Mr Ablakwa and Dr. Boamah, Deputy Ministers of Information and Environment, Science and Technology respectively, brought the action against Mr Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) Chairman, who was then the Minister of Tourism and National Orientation, seeking a declaration from the court that he had no right to buy the bungalow at No 2 Mungo Street in the Ridge residential area he was occupying at the time.
The plaintiffs had argued that the action of Mr Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey contravened Articles 20 (5) and 20 (6) and smacked of cronyism and gross abuse of discretional powers of a public officer.
However, Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey raised a preliminary objection, saying the court had no mandate to hear the case.
His argument was that the right procedure was for the plaintiffs to apply to the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), if they thought he was abusing his office by applying to purchase the bungalow.
However, the Supreme Court held otherwise and accordingly dismissed the case.
Court orders BNI to produce DSP Mawuenyegah
January 31, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
The Human Rights Division of the Fast Track High Court, yesterday ordered the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) to produce Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mrs Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda, who is at the centre of the cocaine-turn-sodium carbonate saga at its sitting tomorrow (January 31, 2012).
The court’s order followed the failure of BNI officials to bring the accused person to court as was required by law.
Counsel for Mrs Tehoda, Mr E. A. Vordoagu informed the court of the frustrations the defence team encountered anytime they visited their client at the BNI cells.
According to him, although, BNI officials had been served with hearing notices, they refused to bring their client to court as well as made it impossible for the defence team to have access to her.
Mrs Tehoda, the Deputy Head of the Commercial Crimes Unit of the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service, has applied for bail at the Human Rights Court presided over by Mr Justice Kofi Essel-Mensah.
Mrs Tehoda, has been remanded by the Accra Circuit Court on one count of abetment of stealing of cocaine but her lawyers applied for bail on her behalf at the Human Rights Court.
At the Human Rights Court’s sitting in Accra today, a Chief State Attorney, Mr Rexford Wiredu, prayed the court to adjourn the case to Wednesday because he was out of the jurisdiction and upon return was informed his outfit was served with a copy of Mrs Tehoda’s bail application last Friday.
Mr Vordoagu opposed Mr Wiredu’s plea with the court and said the Attorney-General’s office had sufficient notice and for that reason, the court should ignore Mr Wiredu’s plea.
Responding to Mr Vordoagu’s submission, Mr Wiredu argued that the defence team’s bail application was badly written thereby causing the court to dismiss it on Wednesday, January 25, 2012.
The court, after listening to both parties, ordered the BNI to produce Mrs Tehoda tomorrow (January 31, 2012).
Mrs Tehoda on January 17, 2012 pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of stealing of cocaine and was remanded by the Circuit Court to reappear on February 6, 2012.
The police handed the accused person over to the BNI on December 29, 2011 on suspicious dealings with Nana Ama Martins after she (Nana Martins) had been re-arrested in July 2011.
Nana Martins was acquitted and discharged by the Accra Circuit Court of the charge of possessing cocaine in the trial which was aborted after the court had upheld a submission of ‘no case’ made by her counsel.
Following that, the Vice-President, Mr John Mahama, tasked the BNI to investigate the incident.
The investigation led to the arrest of the accused for her role in the swapping of the cocaine.
Although, her unit was not investigating Nana Martins for any offence, DSP Mrs Tehoda allegedly went for the suspect on different occasions from CID cells and took her to her office and also arranged a lawyer for her.
The trial circuit court had, in September last year, received the alleged cocaine, weighing 1,020 grammes, as exhibit after it had been tested by the Police Forensic Laboratory.
A day after that, counsel for Nana Martins prayed that the substance be retested because it was not cocaine, as alleged by the police report. The re-testing was done and it turned out to be sodium carbonate.
It was during BNI investigations that it came to light that DSP Mrs Tehoda played a role in the swapping of the cocaine and also assisted Nana Martins to sell her house, all to facilitate the swapping.
The prosecution said investigations were still ongoing to identify the collaborators of DSP Mrs Tehoda.
The Human Rights Division of the Fast Track High Court, yesterday ordered the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) to produce Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mrs Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda, who is at the centre of the cocaine-turn-sodium carbonate saga at its sitting tomorrow (January 31, 2012).
The court’s order followed the failure of BNI officials to bring the accused person to court as was required by law.
Counsel for Mrs Tehoda, Mr E. A. Vordoagu informed the court of the frustrations the defence team encountered anytime they visited their client at the BNI cells.
According to him, although, BNI officials had been served with hearing notices, they refused to bring their client to court as well as made it impossible for the defence team to have access to her.
Mrs Tehoda, the Deputy Head of the Commercial Crimes Unit of the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service, has applied for bail at the Human Rights Court presided over by Mr Justice Kofi Essel-Mensah.
Mrs Tehoda, has been remanded by the Accra Circuit Court on one count of abetment of stealing of cocaine but her lawyers applied for bail on her behalf at the Human Rights Court.
At the Human Rights Court’s sitting in Accra today, a Chief State Attorney, Mr Rexford Wiredu, prayed the court to adjourn the case to Wednesday because he was out of the jurisdiction and upon return was informed his outfit was served with a copy of Mrs Tehoda’s bail application last Friday.
Mr Vordoagu opposed Mr Wiredu’s plea with the court and said the Attorney-General’s office had sufficient notice and for that reason, the court should ignore Mr Wiredu’s plea.
Responding to Mr Vordoagu’s submission, Mr Wiredu argued that the defence team’s bail application was badly written thereby causing the court to dismiss it on Wednesday, January 25, 2012.
The court, after listening to both parties, ordered the BNI to produce Mrs Tehoda tomorrow (January 31, 2012).
Mrs Tehoda on January 17, 2012 pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of stealing of cocaine and was remanded by the Circuit Court to reappear on February 6, 2012.
The police handed the accused person over to the BNI on December 29, 2011 on suspicious dealings with Nana Ama Martins after she (Nana Martins) had been re-arrested in July 2011.
Nana Martins was acquitted and discharged by the Accra Circuit Court of the charge of possessing cocaine in the trial which was aborted after the court had upheld a submission of ‘no case’ made by her counsel.
Following that, the Vice-President, Mr John Mahama, tasked the BNI to investigate the incident.
The investigation led to the arrest of the accused for her role in the swapping of the cocaine.
Although, her unit was not investigating Nana Martins for any offence, DSP Mrs Tehoda allegedly went for the suspect on different occasions from CID cells and took her to her office and also arranged a lawyer for her.
The trial circuit court had, in September last year, received the alleged cocaine, weighing 1,020 grammes, as exhibit after it had been tested by the Police Forensic Laboratory.
A day after that, counsel for Nana Martins prayed that the substance be retested because it was not cocaine, as alleged by the police report. The re-testing was done and it turned out to be sodium carbonate.
It was during BNI investigations that it came to light that DSP Mrs Tehoda played a role in the swapping of the cocaine and also assisted Nana Martins to sell her house, all to facilitate the swapping.
The prosecution said investigations were still ongoing to identify the collaborators of DSP Mrs Tehoda.
MEN SLEEP WITH DAUGHTERS - One jailed 10 years, another remanded
A 40-year-old man,Emmanuel Kwesi Yevu, who had sexual intercourse with his 13-year-old daughter, claiming he had woken up from a dream in which he had sex with his late wife, was yesterday sentenced to 10 years imprisonment with hard labour by the Accra Circuit Court.
He pleaded guilty to the offence of incest.
In another case of incest, the court remanded 40-year-old Kwesi Mortsi, for having an affair with his 18-year-old daughter for 18 months and aborting her pregnancy for her on three occasions.
Mortsi, however, pleaded not guilty to one count of incest and was remanded to reappear on Februrary 7, 2012.
In the first case, Yevu had told the court that on a particular occasion, he had taken alcohol, slept and dreamt of having sex with his late wife.
When he woke up, he found out that his daughter had placed one of her legs on him and so, unable to control himself, he had sex with her.
Yevu also claimed a spirit entered him and lured him to have sex with his daughter on two occasions gave her medicines to swallow and another to insert in her vagina when she complained to him that she had not menstruated for three months.
There was profuse laughter when Yevu’s brother got up and informed the court that Yevu was oblivious of his offence because he had been charmed spiritually.
He looked directly at the trial judge, Mrs Georgina Mensah-Dastsa, and said “please have mercy on my brother. This one, ibi juju oooh.”
The judge replied “On a lighter note, I have powers but not juju powers. So take your juju story to a juju court.”
Yevu, who appeared not to be in a position to speak found his voice all of a sudden after his brother had humoured the court and stated in Ewe that evil spirits drove him to sleep with his daughter.
He said the spirits entered him thereby making him have frequent dreams of having sexual intercourse with his late wife.
On a particular occasion, he claimed he took in alcohol, slept, dreamt of having sex with his late wife and upon waking up, he found his daughter had laid one of her legs on him.
The facts of the case as presented by Assistant Superintendent of Police, Mrs Sarah Acquah said the complainant was the victim’s uncle.
She said the victim had been living with the convict at Omanjor in Accra since the death of victim’s mother.
The prosecution said during October 2011, the victim was sleeping when Yevu forced her and had sex with her on two occasions. After the acts, the victim informed her father that she had not menstruated for the past three months.
Yevu, suspecting the victim was pregnant, gave the victim medicine to swallow and insert some of the medicine into her vagina.
Soon after inserting the medicine, the victim began to complain of abdominal pains and she was rushed to the hospital and a report was made to the Domestic Violence and Victims Support Unit (DOVVSU) at Odorkor Police station.
The victim was issued with a medical form while her father was arrested by the Police and during interrogation, Yevu admitted the offence.
Mortsi, on the other hand lived at Dansoman in Accra with his daughter, a school drop out and was for the past one and half years subjecting her to sexual abuse.
On January 16, 2012, Mortsi attempted to have sexual intercourse with his daughter but she refused to heed to his moves.
The next day while preparing to leave for work, Mortsi made sexual moves again but the victim refused thereby infuriating Mortsi who seized her bag in the process.
Mortsi’s action infuriated the victim who reported her sexual ordeal to the police.
Mortsi was picked up for questioning and later charged after police had completed investigations into the matter.
He pleaded guilty to the offence of incest.
In another case of incest, the court remanded 40-year-old Kwesi Mortsi, for having an affair with his 18-year-old daughter for 18 months and aborting her pregnancy for her on three occasions.
Mortsi, however, pleaded not guilty to one count of incest and was remanded to reappear on Februrary 7, 2012.
In the first case, Yevu had told the court that on a particular occasion, he had taken alcohol, slept and dreamt of having sex with his late wife.
When he woke up, he found out that his daughter had placed one of her legs on him and so, unable to control himself, he had sex with her.
Yevu also claimed a spirit entered him and lured him to have sex with his daughter on two occasions gave her medicines to swallow and another to insert in her vagina when she complained to him that she had not menstruated for three months.
There was profuse laughter when Yevu’s brother got up and informed the court that Yevu was oblivious of his offence because he had been charmed spiritually.
He looked directly at the trial judge, Mrs Georgina Mensah-Dastsa, and said “please have mercy on my brother. This one, ibi juju oooh.”
The judge replied “On a lighter note, I have powers but not juju powers. So take your juju story to a juju court.”
Yevu, who appeared not to be in a position to speak found his voice all of a sudden after his brother had humoured the court and stated in Ewe that evil spirits drove him to sleep with his daughter.
He said the spirits entered him thereby making him have frequent dreams of having sexual intercourse with his late wife.
On a particular occasion, he claimed he took in alcohol, slept, dreamt of having sex with his late wife and upon waking up, he found his daughter had laid one of her legs on him.
The facts of the case as presented by Assistant Superintendent of Police, Mrs Sarah Acquah said the complainant was the victim’s uncle.
She said the victim had been living with the convict at Omanjor in Accra since the death of victim’s mother.
The prosecution said during October 2011, the victim was sleeping when Yevu forced her and had sex with her on two occasions. After the acts, the victim informed her father that she had not menstruated for the past three months.
Yevu, suspecting the victim was pregnant, gave the victim medicine to swallow and insert some of the medicine into her vagina.
Soon after inserting the medicine, the victim began to complain of abdominal pains and she was rushed to the hospital and a report was made to the Domestic Violence and Victims Support Unit (DOVVSU) at Odorkor Police station.
The victim was issued with a medical form while her father was arrested by the Police and during interrogation, Yevu admitted the offence.
Mortsi, on the other hand lived at Dansoman in Accra with his daughter, a school drop out and was for the past one and half years subjecting her to sexual abuse.
On January 16, 2012, Mortsi attempted to have sexual intercourse with his daughter but she refused to heed to his moves.
The next day while preparing to leave for work, Mortsi made sexual moves again but the victim refused thereby infuriating Mortsi who seized her bag in the process.
Mortsi’s action infuriated the victim who reported her sexual ordeal to the police.
Mortsi was picked up for questioning and later charged after police had completed investigations into the matter.
Human trafficker jailed 10 years
January 28, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
A trader who trafficked 10 young girls to Nigeria for labour and prostitution has been sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment by the Accra Circuit Court.
Fati Abubakari, who was convicted to five years each on two separate dockets for engaging in human trafficking, was whisked away in a waiting van around 11 am to begin her jail term.
In the first case, she was charged with her former husband for conspiracy and human trafficking.
Her former husband, Bawa Salifu, who was at large during the trial, was, however, acquitted and discharged on two counts of conspiracy and human trafficking.
Fati was, however, convicted on five counts of human trafficking.
In the second case, Fati was charged along with her two sisters, Memuna Abukari and Zinabu Abukari, both traders.
Her sisters were acquitted and discharged on conspiracy and human trafficking charges but the court found Fati guilty and sentenced her to five years’ imprisonment.
The court took into consideration the fact that she was a mother of two and that she was a first offender.
It also ordered Fati to return all items she had seized from her victims, as well as pay them their accrued salaries.
Acquitting the other accused persons, the court held that the prosecution failed to lead evidence to prove their guilt.
The facts of the case were that Fati had, in 2007, trafficked her victims from Agbogloshie in Accra and Gushegu in the Northern Region to Nigeria for labour and prostitution.
According to the prosecuion, the complainant in the case was a member of staff of the Regional Advocacy Information and Network System (RAINS), a non-governmental organisation, while the accused persons lived in Ghana and Nigeria.
It said on December 28, 2010, a victim confided in the complainant that about four years ago she and other girls had been recruited by the accused persons from Agbogbloshie and Gushegu and transported to Nigeria under the pretext of securing them jobs.
The victim told the complainant that she and the other girls were made to sell porridge during the day and forced to engage in prostitution during the night.
According to her, the accused persons took all the proceeds from the sale of the porridge and the prostitution, without paying her and her colleagues anything at all.
In the process, one of the girls was forced into marriage, while one of them went through a series of abortions as a result of having unprotected sex with her male customers.
During investigations, it emerged that Fati had been in the trafficking trade for the past 10 years. She denied committing any offence but admitted transporting a number of girls to Nigeria for work.
A trader who trafficked 10 young girls to Nigeria for labour and prostitution has been sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment by the Accra Circuit Court.
Fati Abubakari, who was convicted to five years each on two separate dockets for engaging in human trafficking, was whisked away in a waiting van around 11 am to begin her jail term.
In the first case, she was charged with her former husband for conspiracy and human trafficking.
Her former husband, Bawa Salifu, who was at large during the trial, was, however, acquitted and discharged on two counts of conspiracy and human trafficking.
Fati was, however, convicted on five counts of human trafficking.
In the second case, Fati was charged along with her two sisters, Memuna Abukari and Zinabu Abukari, both traders.
Her sisters were acquitted and discharged on conspiracy and human trafficking charges but the court found Fati guilty and sentenced her to five years’ imprisonment.
The court took into consideration the fact that she was a mother of two and that she was a first offender.
It also ordered Fati to return all items she had seized from her victims, as well as pay them their accrued salaries.
Acquitting the other accused persons, the court held that the prosecution failed to lead evidence to prove their guilt.
The facts of the case were that Fati had, in 2007, trafficked her victims from Agbogloshie in Accra and Gushegu in the Northern Region to Nigeria for labour and prostitution.
According to the prosecuion, the complainant in the case was a member of staff of the Regional Advocacy Information and Network System (RAINS), a non-governmental organisation, while the accused persons lived in Ghana and Nigeria.
It said on December 28, 2010, a victim confided in the complainant that about four years ago she and other girls had been recruited by the accused persons from Agbogbloshie and Gushegu and transported to Nigeria under the pretext of securing them jobs.
The victim told the complainant that she and the other girls were made to sell porridge during the day and forced to engage in prostitution during the night.
According to her, the accused persons took all the proceeds from the sale of the porridge and the prostitution, without paying her and her colleagues anything at all.
In the process, one of the girls was forced into marriage, while one of them went through a series of abortions as a result of having unprotected sex with her male customers.
During investigations, it emerged that Fati had been in the trafficking trade for the past 10 years. She denied committing any offence but admitted transporting a number of girls to Nigeria for work.
Judge orders prosecution to start money laundering case
January 27, 2011 (Page 3 Lead)
THE judge presiding over the case involving a lawyer and two others allegedly involved in money laundering activities has given the prosecution in the case a one-week ultimatum to start prosecuting the case.
According to Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, the court would advise itself should the prosecution fail to abide by the court’s directive.
Charles Owusu Juanah, a lawyer, Dr. Victor Amoah, an Agronomist and Nana Kwaku Agyei, a miner were first arraigned before the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court on January 19, 2012, charged with two counts of conspiracy and aiding and abetting money laundering activities.
They pleaded not guilty to the offences. Charles and Victor were each granted bail in the sum of $4 million with three sureties each, one each to be justified.
Although, Victor managed to meet the bail terms, Charles could not and that prompted his lawyers to plead with the court at its sitting in Accra today to vary the bail terms.
According to one of the defence lawyers for Charles, Mr George Heward-Mills, the accused person had been in custody for two weeks already with his passport confiscated thereby making it impossible for him to leave the jurisdiction.
He said the bail condition was a great burden on his client and accordingly prayed the court to review the bail conditions for Charles.
Following counsel’s plea, the court reviewed the bail terms and granted Charles bail in the sum of $4 million with three sureties, one to be justified.
The court directed the accused person to deposit a land title deed worth $2.5 million instead of $4 million with the registrar of the court as justification.
He and the other accused persons were also directed to report daily to the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO).
Nana Kwaku Agyei, who was remanded on the last adjourned date was today granted bail in the sum of $4 million with three sureties.
His lawyer, Mr Joseph Turkson, produced a medical report to prove that his client was not well.
An Assistant State Attorney, Mr. Edward Cudjoe, renewed his bail application and prayed the court to grant his client bail on terms he could meet.
The court granted Agyei bail and indicated that the court will review the condition based on his health condition
The accused persons are being accused of allegedly obtaining, through money laundering activities, an amount of $3.5 million.
Juanah, who is alleged to be the principal architect, is said to have collected the $3.5 million from the GT Bank headquarters at about 9:45 p.m. on November 17, 2011 after luring a Dubai-based businessman, Mohammed Shafiq, who is the Chief Executive Officer of Jampur Group, and his agents into the country to establish business dealings in gold.
The prosecution said when Mr Shafiq and his agents arrived in Ghana, they were told that the gold had been lodged in a vault at the SG-SSB Bank and were made to pay $3.5 million before it would be released.
It said the money was lodged in an account at the Abeka branch of the GT Bank and the alleged gold subsequently handed over to the buyers.
The prosecution further stated that when Mr Shafiq and his agents decided to verify the authenticity of 135 kilogrammes of gold after it had been delivered, only 5 kilogrammes was found to be authentic.
It said when Mr Shafiq and his agents complained and threatened to lodge a complaint with the police, Juanah allegedly warned them not to dare, as they would be incarcerated for transacting an illegitimate business as illegal immigrants.
It said Mr Shafiq and his agents quickly left the country for Dubai and were advised to lodge a complaint with the National Security, which referred the matter to EOCO.
According to the prosecution, investigations had so far revealed that Juanah drafted the contract agreement for the transactions, acted as solicitor to both the buyer and the seller, while Amoah, a friend of Juanah and Amoah, acted as consultant to Mr Shafiq and his agent.
THE judge presiding over the case involving a lawyer and two others allegedly involved in money laundering activities has given the prosecution in the case a one-week ultimatum to start prosecuting the case.
According to Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, the court would advise itself should the prosecution fail to abide by the court’s directive.
Charles Owusu Juanah, a lawyer, Dr. Victor Amoah, an Agronomist and Nana Kwaku Agyei, a miner were first arraigned before the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court on January 19, 2012, charged with two counts of conspiracy and aiding and abetting money laundering activities.
They pleaded not guilty to the offences. Charles and Victor were each granted bail in the sum of $4 million with three sureties each, one each to be justified.
Although, Victor managed to meet the bail terms, Charles could not and that prompted his lawyers to plead with the court at its sitting in Accra today to vary the bail terms.
According to one of the defence lawyers for Charles, Mr George Heward-Mills, the accused person had been in custody for two weeks already with his passport confiscated thereby making it impossible for him to leave the jurisdiction.
He said the bail condition was a great burden on his client and accordingly prayed the court to review the bail conditions for Charles.
Following counsel’s plea, the court reviewed the bail terms and granted Charles bail in the sum of $4 million with three sureties, one to be justified.
The court directed the accused person to deposit a land title deed worth $2.5 million instead of $4 million with the registrar of the court as justification.
He and the other accused persons were also directed to report daily to the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO).
Nana Kwaku Agyei, who was remanded on the last adjourned date was today granted bail in the sum of $4 million with three sureties.
His lawyer, Mr Joseph Turkson, produced a medical report to prove that his client was not well.
An Assistant State Attorney, Mr. Edward Cudjoe, renewed his bail application and prayed the court to grant his client bail on terms he could meet.
The court granted Agyei bail and indicated that the court will review the condition based on his health condition
The accused persons are being accused of allegedly obtaining, through money laundering activities, an amount of $3.5 million.
Juanah, who is alleged to be the principal architect, is said to have collected the $3.5 million from the GT Bank headquarters at about 9:45 p.m. on November 17, 2011 after luring a Dubai-based businessman, Mohammed Shafiq, who is the Chief Executive Officer of Jampur Group, and his agents into the country to establish business dealings in gold.
The prosecution said when Mr Shafiq and his agents arrived in Ghana, they were told that the gold had been lodged in a vault at the SG-SSB Bank and were made to pay $3.5 million before it would be released.
It said the money was lodged in an account at the Abeka branch of the GT Bank and the alleged gold subsequently handed over to the buyers.
The prosecution further stated that when Mr Shafiq and his agents decided to verify the authenticity of 135 kilogrammes of gold after it had been delivered, only 5 kilogrammes was found to be authentic.
It said when Mr Shafiq and his agents complained and threatened to lodge a complaint with the police, Juanah allegedly warned them not to dare, as they would be incarcerated for transacting an illegitimate business as illegal immigrants.
It said Mr Shafiq and his agents quickly left the country for Dubai and were advised to lodge a complaint with the National Security, which referred the matter to EOCO.
According to the prosecution, investigations had so far revealed that Juanah drafted the contract agreement for the transactions, acted as solicitor to both the buyer and the seller, while Amoah, a friend of Juanah and Amoah, acted as consultant to Mr Shafiq and his agent.
DSP Mawuenyegah applies for bail
January 26, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
The interdicted Deputy Head of the Commercial Crimes Unit of the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service, DSP Mrs Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda, who is at the centre of the cocaine-turn-sodium carbonate saga, has applied for bail at the Human Rights Court.
Mrs Tehoda, who was remanded by the Accra Circuit Court on one count of abetment of stealing of cocaine on January 17, 2012 was not present at the Human Rights Court.
The presiding judge, Mr Justice U. P. Dery, drew counsel’s attention to some technical errors on the docket and accordingly advised counsel to rectify them.
Following that development, the court, could not hear her case due to the technical errors which needed to be rectified by counsel for Mrs Tehoda, Mr Oliver Dzeble.
Details of the bail application were not made available. A new date is yet to be fixed for the hearing of the bail application.
Mrs Tehoda on January 17, 2012 pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of stealing of cocaine and was remanded by the Circuit Court to reappear on February 6, 2012.
The court declined bail application by counsel for the accused.
The accused person was handed over to the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) by the police on December 29, 2011 on suspicious dealings with Nana Ama Martins after she (Nana Martins) had been re-arrested in July 2011.
Nana Martins was acquitted and discharged by the Accra Circuit Court of the charge of possessing cocaine in the trial which was aborted after the court had upheld a submission of ‘no case’ made by her counsel.
Following that, the Vice-President, Mr John Mahama, tasked the BNI to investigate the incident.
The investigation led to the arrest of the accused, who was handed over for her role in the swapping of the cocaine.
Although, her unit was not investigating Nana Martins for any offence, DSP Mrs Tehoda allegedly went for the suspect on different occasions from CID cells and took her to her office and also arranged a lawyer for her.
The trial circuit court had, in September last year, received the alleged cocaine, weighing 1,020 grammes, as exhibit after it had been tested by the Police Forensic Laboratory.
A day after that, counsel for Nana Martins prayed that the substance be retested because it was not cocaine, as alleged by the police report. The re-testing was done and it turned out to be sodium carbonate.
It was during BNI investigations that it came to light that DSP Mrs Tehoda played a role in the swapping of the cocaine and also assisted Nana Martins to sell her house, all to facilitate the swapping.
The prosecution said investigations were still ongoing to identify the collaborators of DSP Mrs Tehoda, who was admitted to bail by the Human Rights High Court for the abuse of her constitutional rights.
The interdicted Deputy Head of the Commercial Crimes Unit of the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service, DSP Mrs Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda, who is at the centre of the cocaine-turn-sodium carbonate saga, has applied for bail at the Human Rights Court.
Mrs Tehoda, who was remanded by the Accra Circuit Court on one count of abetment of stealing of cocaine on January 17, 2012 was not present at the Human Rights Court.
The presiding judge, Mr Justice U. P. Dery, drew counsel’s attention to some technical errors on the docket and accordingly advised counsel to rectify them.
Following that development, the court, could not hear her case due to the technical errors which needed to be rectified by counsel for Mrs Tehoda, Mr Oliver Dzeble.
Details of the bail application were not made available. A new date is yet to be fixed for the hearing of the bail application.
Mrs Tehoda on January 17, 2012 pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of stealing of cocaine and was remanded by the Circuit Court to reappear on February 6, 2012.
The court declined bail application by counsel for the accused.
The accused person was handed over to the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) by the police on December 29, 2011 on suspicious dealings with Nana Ama Martins after she (Nana Martins) had been re-arrested in July 2011.
Nana Martins was acquitted and discharged by the Accra Circuit Court of the charge of possessing cocaine in the trial which was aborted after the court had upheld a submission of ‘no case’ made by her counsel.
Following that, the Vice-President, Mr John Mahama, tasked the BNI to investigate the incident.
The investigation led to the arrest of the accused, who was handed over for her role in the swapping of the cocaine.
Although, her unit was not investigating Nana Martins for any offence, DSP Mrs Tehoda allegedly went for the suspect on different occasions from CID cells and took her to her office and also arranged a lawyer for her.
The trial circuit court had, in September last year, received the alleged cocaine, weighing 1,020 grammes, as exhibit after it had been tested by the Police Forensic Laboratory.
A day after that, counsel for Nana Martins prayed that the substance be retested because it was not cocaine, as alleged by the police report. The re-testing was done and it turned out to be sodium carbonate.
It was during BNI investigations that it came to light that DSP Mrs Tehoda played a role in the swapping of the cocaine and also assisted Nana Martins to sell her house, all to facilitate the swapping.
The prosecution said investigations were still ongoing to identify the collaborators of DSP Mrs Tehoda, who was admitted to bail by the Human Rights High Court for the abuse of her constitutional rights.
High court dismisses action
January 23, 2012 (Page 3)
THE Accra High Court yesterday dismissed a motion for interlocutory injunction seeking an order to restrain the People’s National Convention (PNC) from organising the party’s delegate congress.
According to the court, the applicants failed to provide independent evidence to substantiate allegations of fraud leveled against the defendants.
It accordingly dismissed the application for interlocutory injunction and awarded cost of GHC 2,000 against Ibrahim Karim, Haruna Abass, Abubakari Sadick Wiyor, Benard Bama-Ame and Michale Anafo who had brought an action against, three executives of the PNC, Dr Edward Mahama, Alhaji Ahmed Ramadan and Benard Mornah.
The court’s ruling will now pave the way for the fixing of a new date for the national delegates which was originally scheduled to take place in Sunyani from December 9-11, 2011.
Following a motion for stay of proceedings pending the outcome of an appeal filed by counsel for the defendants, Dr. Somtim Tobiga, the court adjourned the hearing of the substantive case sine die.
In the said appeal, the applicants/appellants are challenging the court’s decision which dismissed their preliminary objection of conflict of interest raised against counsel for the party, Mr James Agalga and four of its leaders, who have been sued by the defendants/appellants.
The defendants/appellants said it was wrong for Mr Agalga to represent the respondents because the party was the victim in the matter and it was unethical for counsel to represent both the victim and the perpetrators of the act against the victim.
However, Mr Agalga responded that the objection was misplaced because the court was not the right forum to ventilate it and also the PNC was an inanimate object which could sue and be sued and behind which was the leadership who acted for it.
In the substantive suit, the are also seeking an order to restrain the PNC, Dr Mahama, Alhaji Ramadan and Mr Mornah from introducing themselves as the Leader, Chairman and General Secretary, respectively, of the party or to grant interviews to the media or participate in any media or public programme in their purported capacities as such.
They are further seeking an order to restrain the respondents from withdrawing or spending any funds from the account of the PNC or soliciting any funds from any person or organisation for the benefit or on behalf of the party.
THE Accra High Court yesterday dismissed a motion for interlocutory injunction seeking an order to restrain the People’s National Convention (PNC) from organising the party’s delegate congress.
According to the court, the applicants failed to provide independent evidence to substantiate allegations of fraud leveled against the defendants.
It accordingly dismissed the application for interlocutory injunction and awarded cost of GHC 2,000 against Ibrahim Karim, Haruna Abass, Abubakari Sadick Wiyor, Benard Bama-Ame and Michale Anafo who had brought an action against, three executives of the PNC, Dr Edward Mahama, Alhaji Ahmed Ramadan and Benard Mornah.
The court’s ruling will now pave the way for the fixing of a new date for the national delegates which was originally scheduled to take place in Sunyani from December 9-11, 2011.
Following a motion for stay of proceedings pending the outcome of an appeal filed by counsel for the defendants, Dr. Somtim Tobiga, the court adjourned the hearing of the substantive case sine die.
In the said appeal, the applicants/appellants are challenging the court’s decision which dismissed their preliminary objection of conflict of interest raised against counsel for the party, Mr James Agalga and four of its leaders, who have been sued by the defendants/appellants.
The defendants/appellants said it was wrong for Mr Agalga to represent the respondents because the party was the victim in the matter and it was unethical for counsel to represent both the victim and the perpetrators of the act against the victim.
However, Mr Agalga responded that the objection was misplaced because the court was not the right forum to ventilate it and also the PNC was an inanimate object which could sue and be sued and behind which was the leadership who acted for it.
In the substantive suit, the are also seeking an order to restrain the PNC, Dr Mahama, Alhaji Ramadan and Mr Mornah from introducing themselves as the Leader, Chairman and General Secretary, respectively, of the party or to grant interviews to the media or participate in any media or public programme in their purported capacities as such.
They are further seeking an order to restrain the respondents from withdrawing or spending any funds from the account of the PNC or soliciting any funds from any person or organisation for the benefit or on behalf of the party.
Two remanded for supplying narcotic drugs
January 24, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
Two persons were on Monday remanded by the Accra Circuit Court for allegedly possessing and supplying narcotic drugs.
Hamza Mohammed was charged with one count of possessing 46 wrappers of cocaine and 14 wrappers of heroin, while Kwaku Bagnabu was charged with one count of supplying narcotic drugs.
They both pleaded not guilty to the offence and were remanded to reappear on February 6, 2012.
The case took a twist when Hamza informed the court that he had been forced to mention Bagnabu as his supplier as a result of the torture he had suffered at the hands of the police.
Following Hamza's revelation, counsel for Bagnabu, Mr George Asamani, prayed the court to grant his client bail but it declined and fixed February 6, 2012 as the next adjourned date.
According to Mr Asamani, his client was innocent and was simply being held for keeping papers in his room, adding that “teachers and printing press owners should also be arrested”.
His statement drew a huge laughter from the audience in the courtroom.
The facts of the case, as narrated by Assistant Superintendent of Police Mr Cletus Abadamlora, were that on December 20, 2011, a police highway patrol team from the Police Headquarters stopped a vehicle at La Aplaku on the Aflao road and found wrappers in the vehicle.
According to the prosecution, the patrol team observed that 46 wrappers contained cocaine, while 14 wrappers contained heroin. Test results from the Ghana Standards Authority (GSA) proved the police were right.
Hamza mentioned Bagnabu as the supplier of the narcotic drugs during interrogation, thereby resulting in Bagnabu's arrest.
However, during the court's sitting in Accra Monday, Hamza informed the court that Bagnabu had no hand in the crime he (Hamza) was alleged to have committed.
Two persons were on Monday remanded by the Accra Circuit Court for allegedly possessing and supplying narcotic drugs.
Hamza Mohammed was charged with one count of possessing 46 wrappers of cocaine and 14 wrappers of heroin, while Kwaku Bagnabu was charged with one count of supplying narcotic drugs.
They both pleaded not guilty to the offence and were remanded to reappear on February 6, 2012.
The case took a twist when Hamza informed the court that he had been forced to mention Bagnabu as his supplier as a result of the torture he had suffered at the hands of the police.
Following Hamza's revelation, counsel for Bagnabu, Mr George Asamani, prayed the court to grant his client bail but it declined and fixed February 6, 2012 as the next adjourned date.
According to Mr Asamani, his client was innocent and was simply being held for keeping papers in his room, adding that “teachers and printing press owners should also be arrested”.
His statement drew a huge laughter from the audience in the courtroom.
The facts of the case, as narrated by Assistant Superintendent of Police Mr Cletus Abadamlora, were that on December 20, 2011, a police highway patrol team from the Police Headquarters stopped a vehicle at La Aplaku on the Aflao road and found wrappers in the vehicle.
According to the prosecution, the patrol team observed that 46 wrappers contained cocaine, while 14 wrappers contained heroin. Test results from the Ghana Standards Authority (GSA) proved the police were right.
Hamza mentioned Bagnabu as the supplier of the narcotic drugs during interrogation, thereby resulting in Bagnabu's arrest.
However, during the court's sitting in Accra Monday, Hamza informed the court that Bagnabu had no hand in the crime he (Hamza) was alleged to have committed.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Lawyer Granted Bail For Alleged Money Laundering
Friday, January 20, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
The lawyer accused of aiding money laundering activities, Charles Owusu Juanah, was yesterday granted bail in the sum of $4 million with two sureties, one of which is to be justified.
The Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court also granted bail in the sum of $4 million with two sureties, one of which to be justified, to his alleged accomplice, Victor Amoah.
They were also ordered to report themselves at the offices of the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) at 10 a.m. daily.
A third accused person, Nana Kwaku Agyei, was, however, remanded to reappear on January 26, 2012.
Juanah and Amoah, who pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and aiding and abetting money laundering activities, were granted bail after the prosecution had substituted an earlier charge sheet with a new one.
They were initially charged with conspiracy and money laundering. They are being accused of obtaining, through money laundering activities, $3.5 million from a Dubai-based businessman, Mohammed Shafiq, who is the Chief Executive Officer of Jampur Group, and his agents.
At the court’s sitting in Accra yesterday, a large crowd which had thronged the court premises to give support to the accused persons applauded thunderously immediately the trial judge, Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, announced that the two had been granted bail.
The judge, however, brought the crowd to order and warned them not to repeat that act or risk being cited for contempt of court.
Bail was granted to the two after their team of lawyers had prayed the court to grant them bail on the grounds that charges preferred against them were bailable offences.
Lead counsel for Juanah and Amoah, Mr Ellis Owusu-Fordjour, argued that the charges preferred against his clients were flawed and asked, “How can one aid and abet money laundering offences?”
He prayed the court to grant his clients bail for proper investigations to be carried out to determine whether or not his clients were the proper ones to be charged.
Mr Owusu-Fordjour informed the court that his clients were responsible persons who had offices and permanent places of abode and for that reason they would not flout the court’s orders when granted bail.
He also informed the court that his clients had substantial sureties who were willing to stand in for the accused persons, adding that the Constitution deemed the accused persons innocent until proved guilty.
One of the lawyers for Juanah and Amoah, Mr George Heward-Mills, argued that it would be unjust for the court to hold their clients under the circumstance, adding, “If you persist in prayer, the Lord will answer you.”
Counsel for Agyei, Mr Joseph Turkson, prayed the court to grant his client bail under reasonable terms and conditions.
A State Attorney, Mr Edward Cudjoe, on the other hand, disagreed with the defence team and prayed the court to remand the accused persons, since investigations were ongoing.
Juanah, who is alleged to be the principal architect, is said to have collected the $3.5 million from the GT Bank headquarters about 9:45 p.m. on November 17, 2011 after luring Mr Shafiq and his agents into the country to establish business dealings in gold.
The prosecution said when Mr Shafiq and his agents arrived in Ghana, they were told that the gold had been lodged in a vault at the SG-SSB Bank and were made to pay $3.5 million before it would be released.
It said the money was lodged in an account at the Abeka branch of the GT Bank and the alleged gold subsequently handed over to the buyers.
The prosecution further stated that when Mr Shafiq and his agents decided to verify the authenticity of the 135 kilogrammes of gold after it had been delivered, only five kilogrammes was found to be authentic.
It said when Mr Shafiq and his agents complained and threatened to lodge a complaint with the police, Juanah allegedly warned them not to dare, as they would be incarcerated for transacting an illegitimate business as illegal immigrants.
It said Mr Shafiq and his agents quickly left the country for Dubai and were advised to lodge a complaint with the National Security, which referred the matter to EOCO.
According to the prosecution, investigations had so far revealed that Juanah drafted the contract agreement for the transactions and acted as solicitor for both the buyer and the seller, while Amoah, a friend of Juanah and Agyei, acted as consultant to Mr Shafiq and his agents.
The lawyer accused of aiding money laundering activities, Charles Owusu Juanah, was yesterday granted bail in the sum of $4 million with two sureties, one of which is to be justified.
The Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court also granted bail in the sum of $4 million with two sureties, one of which to be justified, to his alleged accomplice, Victor Amoah.
They were also ordered to report themselves at the offices of the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) at 10 a.m. daily.
A third accused person, Nana Kwaku Agyei, was, however, remanded to reappear on January 26, 2012.
Juanah and Amoah, who pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and aiding and abetting money laundering activities, were granted bail after the prosecution had substituted an earlier charge sheet with a new one.
They were initially charged with conspiracy and money laundering. They are being accused of obtaining, through money laundering activities, $3.5 million from a Dubai-based businessman, Mohammed Shafiq, who is the Chief Executive Officer of Jampur Group, and his agents.
At the court’s sitting in Accra yesterday, a large crowd which had thronged the court premises to give support to the accused persons applauded thunderously immediately the trial judge, Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, announced that the two had been granted bail.
The judge, however, brought the crowd to order and warned them not to repeat that act or risk being cited for contempt of court.
Bail was granted to the two after their team of lawyers had prayed the court to grant them bail on the grounds that charges preferred against them were bailable offences.
Lead counsel for Juanah and Amoah, Mr Ellis Owusu-Fordjour, argued that the charges preferred against his clients were flawed and asked, “How can one aid and abet money laundering offences?”
He prayed the court to grant his clients bail for proper investigations to be carried out to determine whether or not his clients were the proper ones to be charged.
Mr Owusu-Fordjour informed the court that his clients were responsible persons who had offices and permanent places of abode and for that reason they would not flout the court’s orders when granted bail.
He also informed the court that his clients had substantial sureties who were willing to stand in for the accused persons, adding that the Constitution deemed the accused persons innocent until proved guilty.
One of the lawyers for Juanah and Amoah, Mr George Heward-Mills, argued that it would be unjust for the court to hold their clients under the circumstance, adding, “If you persist in prayer, the Lord will answer you.”
Counsel for Agyei, Mr Joseph Turkson, prayed the court to grant his client bail under reasonable terms and conditions.
A State Attorney, Mr Edward Cudjoe, on the other hand, disagreed with the defence team and prayed the court to remand the accused persons, since investigations were ongoing.
Juanah, who is alleged to be the principal architect, is said to have collected the $3.5 million from the GT Bank headquarters about 9:45 p.m. on November 17, 2011 after luring Mr Shafiq and his agents into the country to establish business dealings in gold.
The prosecution said when Mr Shafiq and his agents arrived in Ghana, they were told that the gold had been lodged in a vault at the SG-SSB Bank and were made to pay $3.5 million before it would be released.
It said the money was lodged in an account at the Abeka branch of the GT Bank and the alleged gold subsequently handed over to the buyers.
The prosecution further stated that when Mr Shafiq and his agents decided to verify the authenticity of the 135 kilogrammes of gold after it had been delivered, only five kilogrammes was found to be authentic.
It said when Mr Shafiq and his agents complained and threatened to lodge a complaint with the police, Juanah allegedly warned them not to dare, as they would be incarcerated for transacting an illegitimate business as illegal immigrants.
It said Mr Shafiq and his agents quickly left the country for Dubai and were advised to lodge a complaint with the National Security, which referred the matter to EOCO.
According to the prosecution, investigations had so far revealed that Juanah drafted the contract agreement for the transactions and acted as solicitor for both the buyer and the seller, while Amoah, a friend of Juanah and Agyei, acted as consultant to Mr Shafiq and his agents.
Osafo-Maafo Drags EOCO To Court
Thursday, January 19,2011 (Page 3 Lead)
A former Minister of State, Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo, has dragged the Economic and Organised Crimes Office (EOCO) to the Fast Track High Court, challenging EOCO’s decision to invite him to testify in investigations into the payment of GH¢58 million to a businessman, Mr Alfred Woyome.
According to Mr Osafo-Maafo, who was once a Minister of Finance and Economic Planning, public utterances by the President, the Deputy Attorney-General and the EOCO clearly indicated bias and the likelihood that the investigations would be prejudiced against him.
He is, accordingly, praying the court to declare that the purported investigations being undertaken by EOCO into what he termed suspected serious offences, including fraud in the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008, and an invitation to him to assist in investigations were unlawful to the extent that they were issues raised in a report of the Auditor-General duly laid before Parliament.
The plaintiff is further praying the court to declare that the circumstances involving the payment of the colossal sum of GH¢58,095,974.13 to Mr Woyome and the acts and utterances of the President, the Deputy Attorney-General and the EOCO disabled EOCO from acting in a fair and reasonable manner.
Mr Osafo-Maafo, who is also a former Minister of Education, is pleading with the court to declare that the purported investigations being undertaken by EOCO were actuated by bias and prejudice and, therefore, unlawful under the 1992 Constitution.
He is also seeking an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from proceeding with the investigations into the so-called suspected serious offences, including fraud in the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008, as well as other reliefs the court might deem fit.
At the court’s sitting in Accra yesterday, the trial judge, Mr Justice Dennis Adjei, a Court of Appeal judge with additional responsibilities as a High Court judge, appealed to parties in the case not to take any steps that would prejudice the outcome of the case.
The matter could not be heard by the court yesterday because counsel for EOCO, Dr Philip Anderson, had sent a letter and a medical report indicating that he was indisposed.
Counsel for Mr Osafo-Maafo, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, then prayed the court to stop EOCO from continuing with investigations until the final determination of the matter.
The presiding judge advised Mr Dame to file an application for contempt against EOCO but Mr Dame said it would not serve any purpose, since the investigations might be completed before court processes were filed.
Mr Osafo-Maafo was accompanied to the court by a former Deputy Minister of Sports, Mr O. B. Amoah; Mr Kwaku Agyemang-Manu, a former Deputy Minister of Finance, and other sympathisers.
Meanwhile, the plaintiff has filed an application for interlocutory injunction for an order to restrain EOCO and its agents from continuing with investigations into the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008 pending the final determination of the suit.
According to the applicant, who said he received a letter dated January 5, 2012 inviting him to assist in EOCO’s investigations, his suit had a great chance of success and so unless EOCO was restrained by the court, he would suffer irreparable loss.
An affidavit in support of his suit stated that EOCO’s continuous conduct of investigations into the matter was likely to prejudice a fair hearing and determination of the suit and in the process occasion a miscarriage of justice.
An affidavit in support of the substantive suit and deposed to by counsel for Mr Osafo-Maafo stated, among others, that the President’s directive to EOCO was a ruse in furtherance of the President’s agenda to divert attention and calculated at vindicating his prior public pronouncements of wrongdoing and impropriety by key members of the erstwhile New Patriotic Party (NPP) administration.
It said the various public statements of the President, as well as other government functionaries, on the payment of money to Mr Woyome undoubtedly demonstrated the bias and the prejudice of the government and the Office of the Attorney-General, the authority with oversight responsibility for EOCO.
According to the affidavit in support, “Given the ample exhibition of bias and prejudice against key personalities in the erstwhile Kufuor administration, including the plaintiff, the defendant cannot be trusted to carry out any fair or impartial investigations into the relevant issues in controversy.”
It further pointed out that the President’s directive mandating EOCO to carry out the investigations in question was in utter bad faith and in gross contravention of the injunction imposed on all persons in positions of authority by the combined effect of articles 23 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution to act fairly, reasonably and in accordance with due process and in a manner devoid of prejudice, arbitrariness and capriciousness.
“Indeed, the conduct of the President and the Attorney-General so far flouts the fundamental principle of natural justice underpinning our legal system for a person not to be a judge in his own cause and for that matter ought to be curtailed by this honourable court,” the affidavit in support stated.
It added that the Constitution mandated only Parliament to investigate matters arising out of reports of the Auditor-General.
A former Minister of State, Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo, has dragged the Economic and Organised Crimes Office (EOCO) to the Fast Track High Court, challenging EOCO’s decision to invite him to testify in investigations into the payment of GH¢58 million to a businessman, Mr Alfred Woyome.
According to Mr Osafo-Maafo, who was once a Minister of Finance and Economic Planning, public utterances by the President, the Deputy Attorney-General and the EOCO clearly indicated bias and the likelihood that the investigations would be prejudiced against him.
He is, accordingly, praying the court to declare that the purported investigations being undertaken by EOCO into what he termed suspected serious offences, including fraud in the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008, and an invitation to him to assist in investigations were unlawful to the extent that they were issues raised in a report of the Auditor-General duly laid before Parliament.
The plaintiff is further praying the court to declare that the circumstances involving the payment of the colossal sum of GH¢58,095,974.13 to Mr Woyome and the acts and utterances of the President, the Deputy Attorney-General and the EOCO disabled EOCO from acting in a fair and reasonable manner.
Mr Osafo-Maafo, who is also a former Minister of Education, is pleading with the court to declare that the purported investigations being undertaken by EOCO were actuated by bias and prejudice and, therefore, unlawful under the 1992 Constitution.
He is also seeking an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from proceeding with the investigations into the so-called suspected serious offences, including fraud in the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008, as well as other reliefs the court might deem fit.
At the court’s sitting in Accra yesterday, the trial judge, Mr Justice Dennis Adjei, a Court of Appeal judge with additional responsibilities as a High Court judge, appealed to parties in the case not to take any steps that would prejudice the outcome of the case.
The matter could not be heard by the court yesterday because counsel for EOCO, Dr Philip Anderson, had sent a letter and a medical report indicating that he was indisposed.
Counsel for Mr Osafo-Maafo, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, then prayed the court to stop EOCO from continuing with investigations until the final determination of the matter.
The presiding judge advised Mr Dame to file an application for contempt against EOCO but Mr Dame said it would not serve any purpose, since the investigations might be completed before court processes were filed.
Mr Osafo-Maafo was accompanied to the court by a former Deputy Minister of Sports, Mr O. B. Amoah; Mr Kwaku Agyemang-Manu, a former Deputy Minister of Finance, and other sympathisers.
Meanwhile, the plaintiff has filed an application for interlocutory injunction for an order to restrain EOCO and its agents from continuing with investigations into the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008 pending the final determination of the suit.
According to the applicant, who said he received a letter dated January 5, 2012 inviting him to assist in EOCO’s investigations, his suit had a great chance of success and so unless EOCO was restrained by the court, he would suffer irreparable loss.
An affidavit in support of his suit stated that EOCO’s continuous conduct of investigations into the matter was likely to prejudice a fair hearing and determination of the suit and in the process occasion a miscarriage of justice.
An affidavit in support of the substantive suit and deposed to by counsel for Mr Osafo-Maafo stated, among others, that the President’s directive to EOCO was a ruse in furtherance of the President’s agenda to divert attention and calculated at vindicating his prior public pronouncements of wrongdoing and impropriety by key members of the erstwhile New Patriotic Party (NPP) administration.
It said the various public statements of the President, as well as other government functionaries, on the payment of money to Mr Woyome undoubtedly demonstrated the bias and the prejudice of the government and the Office of the Attorney-General, the authority with oversight responsibility for EOCO.
According to the affidavit in support, “Given the ample exhibition of bias and prejudice against key personalities in the erstwhile Kufuor administration, including the plaintiff, the defendant cannot be trusted to carry out any fair or impartial investigations into the relevant issues in controversy.”
It further pointed out that the President’s directive mandating EOCO to carry out the investigations in question was in utter bad faith and in gross contravention of the injunction imposed on all persons in positions of authority by the combined effect of articles 23 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution to act fairly, reasonably and in accordance with due process and in a manner devoid of prejudice, arbitrariness and capriciousness.
“Indeed, the conduct of the President and the Attorney-General so far flouts the fundamental principle of natural justice underpinning our legal system for a person not to be a judge in his own cause and for that matter ought to be curtailed by this honourable court,” the affidavit in support stated.
It added that the Constitution mandated only Parliament to investigate matters arising out of reports of the Auditor-General.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)