Judge declines jurisdiction • Over Ghana@50 case

Thursday, May 7, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)

THE High Court judge designated by the Chief Justice to hear the case involving a former Chief of Staff and Chairman of the National Planning Committee (NPC) of the Ghana@50 celebrations, Kwadwo Mpiani, and the former Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana@50 Secretariat, Dr Charles Wereko-Brobby, yesterday declined jurisdiction over the case.
Mr Justice Charles Quist, who said he was excusing himself from the case in which the two have been charged on four counts of wilfully causing financial loss to the state, explained that his spouse, who is a lawyer by profession, had once worked under Dr Wereko-Brobby when he was the Chief Executive Officer of the Volta River Authority (VRA).
“I am disclosing for the record that A1, Dr Charles Wereko-Brobby, when he was Chief Executive Officer of VRA, worked with my spouse and, therefore, my impartiality might be reasonably questioned during or after the trial of the case,” he said.
Citing sections of the Code of Conduct for Judges and Magistrates to support his decision, Mr Justice Quist held that a judge shall disqualify himself if his impartiality might be questioned before, during or after a trial by reason of his or his family’s affiliation with an accused person in a case, among others.
“I am respectfully referring the case to the Chief Justice to transfer it to another court,” he added, thereby bringing the case, which was called around 10:16 a.m., to an end at 10:41 a.m.
In effect, the Chief Justice is expected to appoint another judge to hear the matter.
A new date is expected to be fixed for hearing the matter which, as it stands now, is adjourned indefinitely.
Meanwhile, the accused persons, who have pleaded not guilty to four counts of wilfully causing financial loss to the state, have filed an application praying the Fast Track High Court to strike out the case against them.
According to their lawyers, Messrs Yonny Kulendi and Akoto Ampaw, the prosecution of their clients was premature because the accused persons must be allowed to exhaust their right to appeal against the findings of the Ghana@50 Commission of Enquiry.
They are further arguing that since the findings of the Commission of Enquiry were equivalent to a High Court judgement, the High Court could not be called upon again to make another finding on the same matter and for that reason the prosecution of the accused persons was unlawful and an abuse of their fundamental human rights, as enshrined in the 1992 Constitution.
A Chief State Attorney, Mr Anthony Gyambiby, described the application as “premature” but nevertheless indicated that his outfit would respond to it appropriately.
Mpiani and Wereko-Brobby were present in court and looked indifferent when Mr Justice Quist gave his reasons for excusing himself from the case.
The two were first arraigned on April 22, 2010 before a Court of Appeal judge, Mr Justice Samuel Marful-Sau, who sat with additional responsibility as a High Court judge.
The court admitted each of them to a GH¢35 million self-recognisance bail.
The accused persons were charged following the release of the government’s White Paper on the report of the Commission of Enquiry, which recommended the prosecution of the two, but counsel for the two have argued that the charges against their clients raised very fundamental legal objections which they would lead evidence to prove at the appropriate time.
The facts of the case are that Parliament had approved $31.80 million, equivalent to GH¢29.31 million, for the celebration of Ghana@50 and the holding of the African Union Summit.
The celebration was from January to December 2007.
According to the prosecution, the amount was made up of a first tranche of GH¢18.29 million, which was approved by Parliament on July 20, 2006, and a second tranche which was a loan of $11.80 million, equivalent to GH¢11.02 million, contracted from the Fidelity Bank and approved by Parliament.
It said aside from those sums approved by Parliament, “huge sums of money appeared to have been spent on the celebrations”, adding that more than a year after the celebrations, many projects remained uncompleted and the government was saddled with huge debts.
The prosecution further stated that it was against that background that the Commission of Inquiry was set up by President John Evans Atta Mills to inquire into the activities of the Ghana@50 Secretariat and the entire celebration.
The commission found out that although Parliament had approved GH¢29.31 million for the celebration, GH¢97,776,338.44 had been spent on it, out of which GH¢75,569,563.34 had directly been spent by the secretariat and the NPC.
“The secretariat and the NPC, therefore, spent an amount of GH¢46,999,563 in excess of the amount of money approved by Parliament for the celebration,” the prosecution said.
It further stated that the commission also found that contrary to articles 176 and 178 of the 1992 Constitution, the NPC and the secretariat used all the internally generated funds, totalling GH¢19,352,498.00, without any approval from Parliament.
“These internally generated funds were, however, meant to be used to repay the loan contracted from the Fidelity Bank,” the prosecution pointed out.
The prosecution said the NPC and the secretariat also procured a bridge finance facility of GH¢10,438,036.37 and an overdraft facility of GH¢10 million from the Prudential Bank Limited without parliamentary approval, contrary to Article 181 of the Constitution, adding that both facilities attracted a total interest of GH¢3,082,955.20, “thereby increasing government’s expenditure and causing financial loss to the state”.