February 2, 2010 (Front Page)
THE Accra Fast Track High Court yesterday sentenced four Nigerians to a total of 360 years for robbery.
They are to serve 80 years each with hard labour after they were each found guilty and convicted on two counts of conspiracy and robbery.
Heavily armed Emmanuel Emeka, 38; Samuel Tanko, 28; Promise Emeka, 27, and Efanye Osuchukwu, 33, around 1 a.m. on February 25, 2006 forcibly entered the residence of an Accra-based legal practitioner, inflicted deep machete wounds on her and her brother and robbed them of valuable items.
The items included a Konica camera, two mobile phones, jewellery, a handbag containing valuable documents, including a drivers’ licence and cash of GH¢150.
Not satisfied with their booty, the convicts, who were armed with a pump action gun with several pouches of ammunition, two locally manufactured pistols, a dagger, machetes and a metal cutter, subjected their victims to severe brutality.
The convicts, who had terrorised more than 50 households at West Legon, Haatso, Kwabenya and Agbogba, all suburbs of Accra, were picked up by the police from their hideout on April 28, 2006.
Citing authorities to buttress the court’s decision, the trial judge, Mr Justice Charles Quist, held that the prosecution had proved the guilt of the four convicts beyond reasonable doubt.
He said robbery was a menace to society and for that reason the court would impose harsh sentences on the convicts to serve as a deterrent.
The court held that the three prosecution witnesses had been consistent in their evidence and there had been abundant proof that the four committed the offence at the residence of the complainant on February 25, 2006.
It said the convicts woefully failed in their bid to defend themselves and rather ended up admitting the offence during cross-examination from the prosecution.
The four had, during cross-examination from a State Attorney, Mr Paul Assibi Abariga, stated that they usually buried the weapons they used for their robberies on a farm at Kwabenya and later picked them up anytime they had an operation to embark upon.
After considering the totality of the evidence adduced, the court, however, acquitted and discharged Chiyioka Joseph, 30, a fifth accused person.
It held that the prosecution failed to prove a case beyond reasonable doubt against Joseph and, accordingly, granted Joseph his freedom after four years in custody.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Pastor's killers jailed 20 years each
Thursday, January 28, 2010 (Front Page)
FOUR robbers who confessed to committing a string of robberies in Accra, leading to the death of a pastor of the Lighthouse Chapel International, Rev Peter Nii Addy, were yesterday sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment each with hard labour.
The four — Yaw Asamoah, Kofi Yeboah, Ebo Kwabena and Osei Prempeh — pleaded guilty to two counts of conspiracy and robbery and were, accordingly, sentenced to serve 20 years each on each count.
The sentences are to run concurrently.
They are standing trial in another court for the murder of Rev Addy.
Prior to their sentencing, the four, who are already serving a 17-year sentence imposed on them by another court, had admitted committing robberies in two different households in November and December 2009, in the course of which they made away with a pump action gun, a box full of cartridges, a car key, cellular phones, a laptop, GH¢70 and other valuable items running into thousands of cedis.
They later used the pump action gun they had forcibly taken from a banker’s house to kill Rev Addy, 26, who had travelled to Accra with his pregnant wife to attend a colleague’s wedding.
Ebo Kwabena was sentenced to an additional 20 years’ imprisonment with hard labour after he had admitted robbing a household at Dokuna, a suburb of Accra, of five cellular phones and GH¢1,700 and shot a young man in the leg.
Kwabena, who spoke Twi, said he had offended God, Ghanaians and the justice system and was, accordingly, pleading with the court not to hand him a harsh sentence.
According to Kwabena, who spoke amid sobs, he was already facing a 17-year sentence and was about to face additional charges at the High Court and for that reason the court should have mercy on him.
The court, presided over by Mrs Patience Mills-Tetteh, sentenced him to 20 years’ imprisonment with hard labour and further ordered that the pump action gun which was forcibly taken away from a banker by the robbers be returned to the banker.
It gave the order after it had satisfied itself with the fact that the banker had registered his gun.
However, the three others claimed they had not been present during the Donkuna robbery and the court adjourned the matter to February 9, 2010 for a full trial.
According to Yeboah, the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) concocted stories against him and the others.
He said, for instance, that the CID said one of the robbery victims lived in an uncompleted house, which was not true, because the house was a fully completed one.
According to him, he pleaded guilty because the investigators had advised him to do so and further stated that some of the facts were not true.
Asamoah, for his part, said he was the second person to be arrested by the police but the charge sheet described him as the first accused person.
Some few minutes after the hearing of the case, a photojournalist from the Daily Guide newspaper was brutally assaulted by prison guards who escorted the convicted robbers from the courtroom.
The photojournalist had attempted to take pictures of the convicted robbers but the prison guards did not take kindly to that and seized his camera and cellular phones and handed him slaps.
The photojournalist, who resisted the prison officers’ attempt to seize his camera, was eventually locked up in cells on the orders of a High Court judge, Mr James B. Benson.
The prison officers were said to have informed the judge, who had heard the commotion from his courtroom, that the photojournalist was being unruly.
He spent more than three hours among the very convicted criminals whose photographs he had attempted to take.
Narrating his ordeal to his colleagues after his release, the photojournalist said all his money had been taken away from him by the remanded prisoners, while one of the convicted robbers had attacked him for attempting to take pictures of him.
FOUR robbers who confessed to committing a string of robberies in Accra, leading to the death of a pastor of the Lighthouse Chapel International, Rev Peter Nii Addy, were yesterday sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment each with hard labour.
The four — Yaw Asamoah, Kofi Yeboah, Ebo Kwabena and Osei Prempeh — pleaded guilty to two counts of conspiracy and robbery and were, accordingly, sentenced to serve 20 years each on each count.
The sentences are to run concurrently.
They are standing trial in another court for the murder of Rev Addy.
Prior to their sentencing, the four, who are already serving a 17-year sentence imposed on them by another court, had admitted committing robberies in two different households in November and December 2009, in the course of which they made away with a pump action gun, a box full of cartridges, a car key, cellular phones, a laptop, GH¢70 and other valuable items running into thousands of cedis.
They later used the pump action gun they had forcibly taken from a banker’s house to kill Rev Addy, 26, who had travelled to Accra with his pregnant wife to attend a colleague’s wedding.
Ebo Kwabena was sentenced to an additional 20 years’ imprisonment with hard labour after he had admitted robbing a household at Dokuna, a suburb of Accra, of five cellular phones and GH¢1,700 and shot a young man in the leg.
Kwabena, who spoke Twi, said he had offended God, Ghanaians and the justice system and was, accordingly, pleading with the court not to hand him a harsh sentence.
According to Kwabena, who spoke amid sobs, he was already facing a 17-year sentence and was about to face additional charges at the High Court and for that reason the court should have mercy on him.
The court, presided over by Mrs Patience Mills-Tetteh, sentenced him to 20 years’ imprisonment with hard labour and further ordered that the pump action gun which was forcibly taken away from a banker by the robbers be returned to the banker.
It gave the order after it had satisfied itself with the fact that the banker had registered his gun.
However, the three others claimed they had not been present during the Donkuna robbery and the court adjourned the matter to February 9, 2010 for a full trial.
According to Yeboah, the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) concocted stories against him and the others.
He said, for instance, that the CID said one of the robbery victims lived in an uncompleted house, which was not true, because the house was a fully completed one.
According to him, he pleaded guilty because the investigators had advised him to do so and further stated that some of the facts were not true.
Asamoah, for his part, said he was the second person to be arrested by the police but the charge sheet described him as the first accused person.
Some few minutes after the hearing of the case, a photojournalist from the Daily Guide newspaper was brutally assaulted by prison guards who escorted the convicted robbers from the courtroom.
The photojournalist had attempted to take pictures of the convicted robbers but the prison guards did not take kindly to that and seized his camera and cellular phones and handed him slaps.
The photojournalist, who resisted the prison officers’ attempt to seize his camera, was eventually locked up in cells on the orders of a High Court judge, Mr James B. Benson.
The prison officers were said to have informed the judge, who had heard the commotion from his courtroom, that the photojournalist was being unruly.
He spent more than three hours among the very convicted criminals whose photographs he had attempted to take.
Narrating his ordeal to his colleagues after his release, the photojournalist said all his money had been taken away from him by the remanded prisoners, while one of the convicted robbers had attacked him for attempting to take pictures of him.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Sale of bungalow to Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey • Full bench to decide suit against 3 ex-govt officials
Wednesday, January 27, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)
A FULL bench will be required to determine the suit against three former government functionaries who were dragged to the Supreme Court by two members of the Committee for Joint Action (CJA) for selling a government bungalow to Mr Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey, a former Minister of State.
Mr Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa and Dr Edward Kofi Omane Boamah, who are now deputy ministers of Information and Environment, Science and Technology, respectively, in the latter part of 2008 sued the Attorney-General, the Chairman of the Lands Commission and the Chief Registrar of Lands at the Lands Title Registry for allocating the property to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey.
At the Supreme Court’s sitting in Accra yesterday, the court, presided over by Mr Justice S. A. Brobbey, informed parties in the matter that the issues raised by the applicants needed constitutional interpretation and for that reason a full bench would be required to delve into the issues.
The matter has since been adjourned sine die (indefinitely).
Other members of the panel which sat on the case yesterday were Mrs Justice Sophia Adinyira, Professor Justice S. K. Date-Bah, Mr Justice P. Baffoe-Bonnie and Mr Justice B. T. Aryeetey.
Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey was present in court.
In the writ invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, the applicants are praying the court to declare that by virtue of articles 20(5), 23, 257, 258, 265, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution, the Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing in the previous government did not have the power to direct the sale, disposal or transfer of any government or public land to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey or any other person or body under any circumstances whatsoever.
They are also praying the court to order that any such direction for the disposal, sale or outright transfer of the said property in dispute or any other public land to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey was illegal and unconstitutional.
The applicants are seeking a declaration that by virtue of articles 20(5), 23, 257, 258, 265, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution, the government was obliged to retain and continue to use, in the public interest, the property in dispute.
They are also seeking a further declaration that the purported sale of the said government bungalow, located at St Mungo Street, Ridge, Accra, by the previous government to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey was in utter contravention of articles 20(5), 23, 257, 258, 265, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution.
According to the applicants, the Supreme Court should order that the purported direction by the then Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing for the disposal, sale or outright transfer of the said property in dispute to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey smacked of cronyism, was arbitrary, capricious, discriminatory and a gross abuse of the discretionary power vested in a public officer under the 1992 Constitution.
The applicants are praying the court to declare that a publication by the Chairman of the Lands Commission and the Chief Registrar of Lands which announced that the said property had been allocated to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey was unconstitutional, void and must be struck out as such, since it was in contravention of articles 20(5), 23, 257, 258, 265, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution.
Additionally, the applicants are praying for an order of perpetual injunction to restrain the Chairman of the Lands Commission and the Chief Registrar of Lands and their agents “from perfecting the registration of a parcel of land designated as Parcel No 29, Block 12, Section 019, in extent 1.04 acres more or less, as delineated on Registry Map No 003/019/1998, on which is situated Republic of Ghana Bungalow No 2, located at St Mungo Street, Ridge, Accra, in the name of Hon Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey”.
A statement of case accompanying the writ said Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey allocated onto himself the government bungalow in dispute as his duty post and resided at the said duty post at a huge cost to the state from 2001 to 2008, although he resigned from his public office some time in 2007 to pursue his presidential ambition.
It said in 2001, when Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey was the Chief of Staff at the Presidency, the head office of the Public Works Department carried out, at his behest, renovation to the tune of GH¢17,254 “through Brockwell Construction & Engineering Limited, not to mention further additional refurbishment carried out at his instance to his taste at extraordinary expense to that state”.
According to the statement of case, Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey subsequently applied to the Chairman of the Lands Commission and the Chief Registrar of Lands for a land title certificate to effectuate what it termed “the illegal and unconstitutional transaction”.
It said the Chairman of the Lands Commission and the Chief Registrar of Lands took the above steps to regularise the grant to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey a land certificate in relation to the said property to effectuate the purported sale of the said government bungalow and plot to him.
According to the statement of case, the applicants wrote to the then Attorney-General, protesting the sale of the said bungalow, but the Attorney-General replied and pointed out that the matter was a constitutional issue.
They further argued that the then Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing did not have the power to “direct the sale, disposal or transfer of any government or public land to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey or any person or body under such circumstances and that any such direction for the disposal, sale or outright transfer of the said property in dispute or any other public land to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey is illegal and unconstitutional”.
A FULL bench will be required to determine the suit against three former government functionaries who were dragged to the Supreme Court by two members of the Committee for Joint Action (CJA) for selling a government bungalow to Mr Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey, a former Minister of State.
Mr Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa and Dr Edward Kofi Omane Boamah, who are now deputy ministers of Information and Environment, Science and Technology, respectively, in the latter part of 2008 sued the Attorney-General, the Chairman of the Lands Commission and the Chief Registrar of Lands at the Lands Title Registry for allocating the property to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey.
At the Supreme Court’s sitting in Accra yesterday, the court, presided over by Mr Justice S. A. Brobbey, informed parties in the matter that the issues raised by the applicants needed constitutional interpretation and for that reason a full bench would be required to delve into the issues.
The matter has since been adjourned sine die (indefinitely).
Other members of the panel which sat on the case yesterday were Mrs Justice Sophia Adinyira, Professor Justice S. K. Date-Bah, Mr Justice P. Baffoe-Bonnie and Mr Justice B. T. Aryeetey.
Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey was present in court.
In the writ invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, the applicants are praying the court to declare that by virtue of articles 20(5), 23, 257, 258, 265, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution, the Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing in the previous government did not have the power to direct the sale, disposal or transfer of any government or public land to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey or any other person or body under any circumstances whatsoever.
They are also praying the court to order that any such direction for the disposal, sale or outright transfer of the said property in dispute or any other public land to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey was illegal and unconstitutional.
The applicants are seeking a declaration that by virtue of articles 20(5), 23, 257, 258, 265, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution, the government was obliged to retain and continue to use, in the public interest, the property in dispute.
They are also seeking a further declaration that the purported sale of the said government bungalow, located at St Mungo Street, Ridge, Accra, by the previous government to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey was in utter contravention of articles 20(5), 23, 257, 258, 265, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution.
According to the applicants, the Supreme Court should order that the purported direction by the then Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing for the disposal, sale or outright transfer of the said property in dispute to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey smacked of cronyism, was arbitrary, capricious, discriminatory and a gross abuse of the discretionary power vested in a public officer under the 1992 Constitution.
The applicants are praying the court to declare that a publication by the Chairman of the Lands Commission and the Chief Registrar of Lands which announced that the said property had been allocated to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey was unconstitutional, void and must be struck out as such, since it was in contravention of articles 20(5), 23, 257, 258, 265, 284 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution.
Additionally, the applicants are praying for an order of perpetual injunction to restrain the Chairman of the Lands Commission and the Chief Registrar of Lands and their agents “from perfecting the registration of a parcel of land designated as Parcel No 29, Block 12, Section 019, in extent 1.04 acres more or less, as delineated on Registry Map No 003/019/1998, on which is situated Republic of Ghana Bungalow No 2, located at St Mungo Street, Ridge, Accra, in the name of Hon Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey”.
A statement of case accompanying the writ said Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey allocated onto himself the government bungalow in dispute as his duty post and resided at the said duty post at a huge cost to the state from 2001 to 2008, although he resigned from his public office some time in 2007 to pursue his presidential ambition.
It said in 2001, when Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey was the Chief of Staff at the Presidency, the head office of the Public Works Department carried out, at his behest, renovation to the tune of GH¢17,254 “through Brockwell Construction & Engineering Limited, not to mention further additional refurbishment carried out at his instance to his taste at extraordinary expense to that state”.
According to the statement of case, Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey subsequently applied to the Chairman of the Lands Commission and the Chief Registrar of Lands for a land title certificate to effectuate what it termed “the illegal and unconstitutional transaction”.
It said the Chairman of the Lands Commission and the Chief Registrar of Lands took the above steps to regularise the grant to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey a land certificate in relation to the said property to effectuate the purported sale of the said government bungalow and plot to him.
According to the statement of case, the applicants wrote to the then Attorney-General, protesting the sale of the said bungalow, but the Attorney-General replied and pointed out that the matter was a constitutional issue.
They further argued that the then Minister for Water Resources, Works and Housing did not have the power to “direct the sale, disposal or transfer of any government or public land to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey or any person or body under such circumstances and that any such direction for the disposal, sale or outright transfer of the said property in dispute or any other public land to Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey is illegal and unconstitutional”.
Teenager jailed 15 years for robbery
Wednesday, January 27, 2010 (Centre Spread)
A young man who robbed a boutique in Accra in broad daylight and indecently assaulted the salesgirl before making away with items worth GH¢2,441 was yesterday sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment with hard labour.
Naab Randy, 18, pleaded guilty to the charge of robbery but denied fondling and sucking the breasts of the salesgirl at gunpoint on December 30, 2010.
The convict, who is also a labourer, told the court that he used the pistol to scare the salesgirl but he did not intend to shoot her.
According to Randy, he needed money to further his education after he had completed junior high school.
Randy robbed the boutique, indecently assaulted the salesgirl, tied her legs and sealed her mouth with Sellotape and walked out of the boutique with his booty.
He was, however, apprehended by the public while walking leisurely by the roadside with his booty after the salesgirl had managed to crawl out of the boutique, raised an alarm and informed passers-by of her ordeal after she had been set free.
The passers-by decided to spread out and track down Randy, who was later spotted some metres away with the items he had stolen from the boutique.
The items, including jeans trousers worth GH¢1,666, T-shirts worth GH¢405, two mobile phones and cash of GH¢100, were retrieved from the convict.
Presenting the facts of the case, a Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mr Kofi Blagodzi, told the court that the convict entered the complainant's boutique around 2.30 p.m. holding a schoolbag and asked her whether she sold men’s T-shirts.
In the process of being attended to, the convict suddenly pulled a pistol, pointed it at the complainant and warned her not to shout or he would shoot her.
He pulled her to a storeroom in the boutique, pushed her down and attempted to have sex with her.
When the complainant pleaded for mercy, the convict stopped, folded her blouse to the top and sucked her breast to his satisfaction.
After the act, Randy asked the complainant where she kept her money. The girl, who was then trembling with fear, pointed to the drawer where the money was kept.
Randy then tied the complainant's legs with Sellotape he found in the shop, sealed her mouth, ransacked the shop, ran off and left the girl to her fate.
The complainant, however, managed to crawl to the main entrance of the boutique where she was spotted by a lady. The girl was subsequently untied by the lady and other passers-by.
After she was set free, the complainant took stock of items, detected the items stolen and quickly mobilised people who trailed the convict to a distance where he was arrested.
A search on him revealed all the stolen items, a pistol and two cartridges.
A young man who robbed a boutique in Accra in broad daylight and indecently assaulted the salesgirl before making away with items worth GH¢2,441 was yesterday sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment with hard labour.
Naab Randy, 18, pleaded guilty to the charge of robbery but denied fondling and sucking the breasts of the salesgirl at gunpoint on December 30, 2010.
The convict, who is also a labourer, told the court that he used the pistol to scare the salesgirl but he did not intend to shoot her.
According to Randy, he needed money to further his education after he had completed junior high school.
Randy robbed the boutique, indecently assaulted the salesgirl, tied her legs and sealed her mouth with Sellotape and walked out of the boutique with his booty.
He was, however, apprehended by the public while walking leisurely by the roadside with his booty after the salesgirl had managed to crawl out of the boutique, raised an alarm and informed passers-by of her ordeal after she had been set free.
The passers-by decided to spread out and track down Randy, who was later spotted some metres away with the items he had stolen from the boutique.
The items, including jeans trousers worth GH¢1,666, T-shirts worth GH¢405, two mobile phones and cash of GH¢100, were retrieved from the convict.
Presenting the facts of the case, a Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mr Kofi Blagodzi, told the court that the convict entered the complainant's boutique around 2.30 p.m. holding a schoolbag and asked her whether she sold men’s T-shirts.
In the process of being attended to, the convict suddenly pulled a pistol, pointed it at the complainant and warned her not to shout or he would shoot her.
He pulled her to a storeroom in the boutique, pushed her down and attempted to have sex with her.
When the complainant pleaded for mercy, the convict stopped, folded her blouse to the top and sucked her breast to his satisfaction.
After the act, Randy asked the complainant where she kept her money. The girl, who was then trembling with fear, pointed to the drawer where the money was kept.
Randy then tied the complainant's legs with Sellotape he found in the shop, sealed her mouth, ransacked the shop, ran off and left the girl to her fate.
The complainant, however, managed to crawl to the main entrance of the boutique where she was spotted by a lady. The girl was subsequently untied by the lady and other passers-by.
After she was set free, the complainant took stock of items, detected the items stolen and quickly mobilised people who trailed the convict to a distance where he was arrested.
A search on him revealed all the stolen items, a pistol and two cartridges.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Bullet which killed Frimpong recovered
Saturday, January 23, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)
THE bullet which ended the life of the former Deputy Managing Director of the Ghana Commercial Bank (GCB), Mr Rokko Frimpong, has been recovered.
The prosecutor in the case involving five soldiers who were alleged to have murdered Mr Frimpong yesterday told the Osu District Magistrate Court that the bullet had been forwarded to the Police Forensic Laboratory for examination.
Assistant Superintendent of Police, Mr Patrick A. Morkeh, however, did not give details about how, when and where the bullet was recovered.
The soldiers — Sergeants Michael Arthur, Richard Somuah and Lamptey Haizel and Corporals Charles Ankumah and Emmanuel Antwi — have been accused of murdering Mr Frimpong, who was deeply involved in the re-denomination exercise three years ago.
They have, accordingly, been charged with two counts of conspiracy and murder but their pleas have not been taken.
Responding to the prosecutor’s submission, counsel for the soldiers, Mr Joe Aboagye Debrah, did not take kindly to what he termed “the prosecution stories”.
He said the prosecution had put the defence team in a “legal limbo” because it had not taken the pleas of the soldiers to enable the defence to apply for bail.
Counsel stated, for instance, that the prosecution filed neither the bill of indictment nor the summary of evidence and stressed that “the prosecution only comes to court with stories”.
Mr Debrah argued that it was public knowledge that a docket on the same matter and involving different persons was currently in the Attorney-General’s office.
He described the accused persons as “fine soldiers” who had served their country well, pointing out that it was, therefore, unfortunate that they had been treated in such an unfair manner.
He said parties in the matter had a responsibility to ensure that the accused persons had an expeditious and fair trial.
Counsel, therefore, prayed the court to compel the prosecution to define the case properly, as well as ensure a speedy trial.
The court, presided over by Mr Emmanuel Bart Brew Plange, directed the prosecution to furnish the court with the bill of indictment, the summary of evidence and the results of the forensic laboratory examination.
He, accordingly, remanded the accused persons to reappear on February 4, 2010.
Family members of the soldiers wept uncontrollably when the soldiers were escorted out of the courtroom by security personnel.
The facts of the case, as presented by the prosecution, are that the soldiers were instructed by a superior officer to kill Mr Frimpong, who was said to have uncovered some fraudulent deals in the re-denomination exercise which incriminated some former top government officials.
According to the prosecution, the five were recruited by their superior officer (name not provided in court) at the 64 Infantry Battalion to eliminate Mr Frimpong, who was said to have uncovered the rot involving some former top-ranking government officials.
Reacting to the prosecution’s assertions, counsel for the soldiers maintained that his clients were innocent, adding that he would prove the innocence of the accused in due course.
The soldiers were picked up barely 72 hours after the Human Rights Court, presided over by Ms Charity Irene Danquah, had, on December 15, 2009, ordered their immediate release from the custody of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI).
The court ordered the release of the five after defence lawyers had argued that their clients’ continued detention was a flagrant abuse of their human rights, as enshrined in the 1992 Constitution, especially when the BNI failed to give a tangible reason for their continued detention.
THE bullet which ended the life of the former Deputy Managing Director of the Ghana Commercial Bank (GCB), Mr Rokko Frimpong, has been recovered.
The prosecutor in the case involving five soldiers who were alleged to have murdered Mr Frimpong yesterday told the Osu District Magistrate Court that the bullet had been forwarded to the Police Forensic Laboratory for examination.
Assistant Superintendent of Police, Mr Patrick A. Morkeh, however, did not give details about how, when and where the bullet was recovered.
The soldiers — Sergeants Michael Arthur, Richard Somuah and Lamptey Haizel and Corporals Charles Ankumah and Emmanuel Antwi — have been accused of murdering Mr Frimpong, who was deeply involved in the re-denomination exercise three years ago.
They have, accordingly, been charged with two counts of conspiracy and murder but their pleas have not been taken.
Responding to the prosecutor’s submission, counsel for the soldiers, Mr Joe Aboagye Debrah, did not take kindly to what he termed “the prosecution stories”.
He said the prosecution had put the defence team in a “legal limbo” because it had not taken the pleas of the soldiers to enable the defence to apply for bail.
Counsel stated, for instance, that the prosecution filed neither the bill of indictment nor the summary of evidence and stressed that “the prosecution only comes to court with stories”.
Mr Debrah argued that it was public knowledge that a docket on the same matter and involving different persons was currently in the Attorney-General’s office.
He described the accused persons as “fine soldiers” who had served their country well, pointing out that it was, therefore, unfortunate that they had been treated in such an unfair manner.
He said parties in the matter had a responsibility to ensure that the accused persons had an expeditious and fair trial.
Counsel, therefore, prayed the court to compel the prosecution to define the case properly, as well as ensure a speedy trial.
The court, presided over by Mr Emmanuel Bart Brew Plange, directed the prosecution to furnish the court with the bill of indictment, the summary of evidence and the results of the forensic laboratory examination.
He, accordingly, remanded the accused persons to reappear on February 4, 2010.
Family members of the soldiers wept uncontrollably when the soldiers were escorted out of the courtroom by security personnel.
The facts of the case, as presented by the prosecution, are that the soldiers were instructed by a superior officer to kill Mr Frimpong, who was said to have uncovered some fraudulent deals in the re-denomination exercise which incriminated some former top government officials.
According to the prosecution, the five were recruited by their superior officer (name not provided in court) at the 64 Infantry Battalion to eliminate Mr Frimpong, who was said to have uncovered the rot involving some former top-ranking government officials.
Reacting to the prosecution’s assertions, counsel for the soldiers maintained that his clients were innocent, adding that he would prove the innocence of the accused in due course.
The soldiers were picked up barely 72 hours after the Human Rights Court, presided over by Ms Charity Irene Danquah, had, on December 15, 2009, ordered their immediate release from the custody of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI).
The court ordered the release of the five after defence lawyers had argued that their clients’ continued detention was a flagrant abuse of their human rights, as enshrined in the 1992 Constitution, especially when the BNI failed to give a tangible reason for their continued detention.
Mobilla killers appeal against ruling
January 22, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)
THE two soldiers accused of murdering the Northern Regional Chairman of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), Alhaji Issa Mobilla, have appealed against the Fast Track High Court’s refusal to allow them to have access to the full list of the potential jurors who will be selected to decide their fate.
Corporal Yaw Appiah and Private Eric Modzaka have also filed a motion for stay of proceedings in the criminal trial instituted against them by the State.
The Accra Fast Track High Court had, on December 17, 2009, refused a request by the two soldiers to have access to the full list of jurors on the grounds that their request, if granted, had the potential of influencing or intimidating the potential jurors.
The court also reminded the accused persons that they had the right to challenge the jurors after they had been empanelled and were about to be sworn in.
At the court’s sitting in Accra yesterday, counsel for the soldiers, Mr Thaddeus Sory, told the court that the fundamental human rights of the accused persons would be negatively affected if the jurors were selected and empanelled before the Court of Appeal sat on his clients’ appeal.
He, therefore, prayed the court to adjourn the matter to enable his clients to pursue the appeal, but the court indicated that it did not have a copy of the motion for stay of proceedings, to which counsel furnished the court with a copy.
Responding to defence counsel’s submissions, a Chief State Attorney, Mr Edward Agyemang-Duodu, indicated that his outfit had received copies of the motions but stated that no date had been fixed for hearing, adding that such a situation could delay the criminal case against the soldiers.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefe, stood the case down for a few minutes to enable Mr Sory to get a date from the registrar of the Court of Appeal.
Mr Sory returned in less than 30 minutes and informed the court that the Court of Appeal would be sitting between February 1 and 3, 2010.
Mr Justice Dzamefe, therefore, adjourned hearing the substantive matter to February 8, 2010.
The court is yet to give its ruling on whether or not to grant the State’s request for jurors in the case to be confined throughout the trial.
The accused persons, who were accompanied by military police officers to and out of the courtroom, are alleged to have acted with Private Seth Goka, who is currently on the run, to murder Alhaji Mobilla.
The facts of the case are that Alhaji Mobilla was arrested by the police on December 9, 2004 for allegedly supplying the youth in Tamale with guns to foment trouble.
While he was in custody, the police received information that his followers and sympathisers were mobilising to free him. The deceased was consequently transferred from police cells to the Kamina Military Barracks and handed over to the three accused persons.
According to the prosecution, Alhaji Mobilla died three hours after he had been handed over to the accused persons who were on duty that day.
The chief pathologist’s report revealed that the deceased had been sent to the hospital dead and that he had died from multiple wounds.
THE two soldiers accused of murdering the Northern Regional Chairman of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), Alhaji Issa Mobilla, have appealed against the Fast Track High Court’s refusal to allow them to have access to the full list of the potential jurors who will be selected to decide their fate.
Corporal Yaw Appiah and Private Eric Modzaka have also filed a motion for stay of proceedings in the criminal trial instituted against them by the State.
The Accra Fast Track High Court had, on December 17, 2009, refused a request by the two soldiers to have access to the full list of jurors on the grounds that their request, if granted, had the potential of influencing or intimidating the potential jurors.
The court also reminded the accused persons that they had the right to challenge the jurors after they had been empanelled and were about to be sworn in.
At the court’s sitting in Accra yesterday, counsel for the soldiers, Mr Thaddeus Sory, told the court that the fundamental human rights of the accused persons would be negatively affected if the jurors were selected and empanelled before the Court of Appeal sat on his clients’ appeal.
He, therefore, prayed the court to adjourn the matter to enable his clients to pursue the appeal, but the court indicated that it did not have a copy of the motion for stay of proceedings, to which counsel furnished the court with a copy.
Responding to defence counsel’s submissions, a Chief State Attorney, Mr Edward Agyemang-Duodu, indicated that his outfit had received copies of the motions but stated that no date had been fixed for hearing, adding that such a situation could delay the criminal case against the soldiers.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefe, stood the case down for a few minutes to enable Mr Sory to get a date from the registrar of the Court of Appeal.
Mr Sory returned in less than 30 minutes and informed the court that the Court of Appeal would be sitting between February 1 and 3, 2010.
Mr Justice Dzamefe, therefore, adjourned hearing the substantive matter to February 8, 2010.
The court is yet to give its ruling on whether or not to grant the State’s request for jurors in the case to be confined throughout the trial.
The accused persons, who were accompanied by military police officers to and out of the courtroom, are alleged to have acted with Private Seth Goka, who is currently on the run, to murder Alhaji Mobilla.
The facts of the case are that Alhaji Mobilla was arrested by the police on December 9, 2004 for allegedly supplying the youth in Tamale with guns to foment trouble.
While he was in custody, the police received information that his followers and sympathisers were mobilising to free him. The deceased was consequently transferred from police cells to the Kamina Military Barracks and handed over to the three accused persons.
According to the prosecution, Alhaji Mobilla died three hours after he had been handed over to the accused persons who were on duty that day.
The chief pathologist’s report revealed that the deceased had been sent to the hospital dead and that he had died from multiple wounds.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
German jailed for cocaine possession
Thursday, January 21, 2010 (Page 3)
THE Greater Accra Regional Tribunal yesterday sentenced a 49-year-old German to 14 years’ imprisonment with hard labour for possessing 7.078 kilogrammes of cocaine.
Heyne Frank, a marketing officer based in Nairobi, Kenya, was arrested at the Kotoka International Airport (KIA) on December 10, 2006 when he arrived at the airport to board an Ethiopian Airlines flight to Kenya.
He was convicted on two counts of attempted exportation of narcotic drugs without lawful authority and possession of narcotic drugs.
The sentences are to run concurrently.
Heyne had claimed he could not speak English and insisted on getting a German interpreter, for which reason the trial began in November 2007, instead of February 28, 2007.
His insistence on an interpreter resulted in the Judicial Service soliciting the services of an interpreter but the convict shocked the court on September 29, 2009 when he decided to speak English to enable the interpreter to travel outside the country.
The tribunal, presided over by Mr Justice Frank Manu, held that the prosecution had led enough evidence to warrant Heyne’s conviction.
After the court had summed up and convicted Heyne on all the counts, his counsel pleaded for leniency and urged the court to take into account the fact that the convict had been in custody for four years.
The facts of the case were that while the convict was undergoing departure formalities at the KIA, a sample trap was used to swipe his palm and then inserted in an itemiser machine.
The results proved that his hand had been contaminated with cocaine, resulting in his body being searched, but nothing was found.
Security officials then searched his travelling bag in his presence and, in the process, a quantity of a substance suspected to be cocaine was found concealed in it.
The substance was field-tested in his presence and it tested positive for cocaine.
It was then forwarded to the Ghana Standards Board (GSB) for analytical examination and a report issued proved that the substance was cocaine.
THE Greater Accra Regional Tribunal yesterday sentenced a 49-year-old German to 14 years’ imprisonment with hard labour for possessing 7.078 kilogrammes of cocaine.
Heyne Frank, a marketing officer based in Nairobi, Kenya, was arrested at the Kotoka International Airport (KIA) on December 10, 2006 when he arrived at the airport to board an Ethiopian Airlines flight to Kenya.
He was convicted on two counts of attempted exportation of narcotic drugs without lawful authority and possession of narcotic drugs.
The sentences are to run concurrently.
Heyne had claimed he could not speak English and insisted on getting a German interpreter, for which reason the trial began in November 2007, instead of February 28, 2007.
His insistence on an interpreter resulted in the Judicial Service soliciting the services of an interpreter but the convict shocked the court on September 29, 2009 when he decided to speak English to enable the interpreter to travel outside the country.
The tribunal, presided over by Mr Justice Frank Manu, held that the prosecution had led enough evidence to warrant Heyne’s conviction.
After the court had summed up and convicted Heyne on all the counts, his counsel pleaded for leniency and urged the court to take into account the fact that the convict had been in custody for four years.
The facts of the case were that while the convict was undergoing departure formalities at the KIA, a sample trap was used to swipe his palm and then inserted in an itemiser machine.
The results proved that his hand had been contaminated with cocaine, resulting in his body being searched, but nothing was found.
Security officials then searched his travelling bag in his presence and, in the process, a quantity of a substance suspected to be cocaine was found concealed in it.
The substance was field-tested in his presence and it tested positive for cocaine.
It was then forwarded to the Ghana Standards Board (GSB) for analytical examination and a report issued proved that the substance was cocaine.
EXOPA Boss makes another appearance • In court
Wednesday, January 20, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)
AN officer of the Narcotics Control Board (NACOB), Mr Anthony Smith, yesterday told the Accra Fast High Court that seven other officers were present when substances found in three tubers of yam belonging to the Chief Executive of Exopa Modelling Agency, Ibrahim Sima, tested positive for cocaine.
Mr Smith was testifying in the trial of Sima, who is alleged to have attempted to export substances believed to be narcotic drugs to Germany on September 7, 2009.
Sima, 39, was arrested at the Kotoka International Airport about 11 p.m. while he was going through departure formalities. He is currently on remand in police custody.
He has pleaded not guilty to two counts of possessing narcotic drugs and attempting to export narcotic drugs without lawful authority.
Led by the prosecutor in his evidence-in-chief, Mr Smith told the court, presided over by Mr Justice Charles Quist, that narcotic officers searched Sima’s travelling bags after he (Sima) had identified the bags as his own and had also stated that he had packed the bags himself.
According to the witness, Sima claimed ownership of the four tubers of yam which were found in his bag. During a careful scrutiny, it was observed that three of the yams had been cut open and re-sealed.
Mr Smith said he questioned Sima why the yam had been cut and re-sealed but Sima could not offer any explanation.
The witness informed the court that he used a knife to cut open the yam and it was then that he discovered the drugs which had been sealed in blue polythene bags.
He stated that he asked Sima why he had done that, to which Sima said he was hard pressed for money and was in debt.
He said Sima also told him that one Salifu at Nima had given him the drugs.
According to the witness, he and his colleagues accompanied Sima to his residence in Tema around 2 a.m. and a further search revealed varieties of yam similar to those which had been found on him at the airport and the glue which was used to re-seal the yams.
Mr Smith said he was in charge of the narcotics team which had been detailed at the airport on September 7, 2009, noting that on that fateful day the team had decided to target frequent travellers.
He said when Sima was questioned why he frequented Germany, he told the team that he had an agency in that country and that accounted for his frequent trips there.
During cross-examination from counsel for Sima, Mr James Agalga, the witness told the court that Sima had been spotted at the Departure Hall of the Kotoka International Airport on the day of his arrest.
Counsel is expected to continue cross-examining the witness on February 1, 2010.
AN officer of the Narcotics Control Board (NACOB), Mr Anthony Smith, yesterday told the Accra Fast High Court that seven other officers were present when substances found in three tubers of yam belonging to the Chief Executive of Exopa Modelling Agency, Ibrahim Sima, tested positive for cocaine.
Mr Smith was testifying in the trial of Sima, who is alleged to have attempted to export substances believed to be narcotic drugs to Germany on September 7, 2009.
Sima, 39, was arrested at the Kotoka International Airport about 11 p.m. while he was going through departure formalities. He is currently on remand in police custody.
He has pleaded not guilty to two counts of possessing narcotic drugs and attempting to export narcotic drugs without lawful authority.
Led by the prosecutor in his evidence-in-chief, Mr Smith told the court, presided over by Mr Justice Charles Quist, that narcotic officers searched Sima’s travelling bags after he (Sima) had identified the bags as his own and had also stated that he had packed the bags himself.
According to the witness, Sima claimed ownership of the four tubers of yam which were found in his bag. During a careful scrutiny, it was observed that three of the yams had been cut open and re-sealed.
Mr Smith said he questioned Sima why the yam had been cut and re-sealed but Sima could not offer any explanation.
The witness informed the court that he used a knife to cut open the yam and it was then that he discovered the drugs which had been sealed in blue polythene bags.
He stated that he asked Sima why he had done that, to which Sima said he was hard pressed for money and was in debt.
He said Sima also told him that one Salifu at Nima had given him the drugs.
According to the witness, he and his colleagues accompanied Sima to his residence in Tema around 2 a.m. and a further search revealed varieties of yam similar to those which had been found on him at the airport and the glue which was used to re-seal the yams.
Mr Smith said he was in charge of the narcotics team which had been detailed at the airport on September 7, 2009, noting that on that fateful day the team had decided to target frequent travellers.
He said when Sima was questioned why he frequented Germany, he told the team that he had an agency in that country and that accounted for his frequent trips there.
During cross-examination from counsel for Sima, Mr James Agalga, the witness told the court that Sima had been spotted at the Departure Hall of the Kotoka International Airport on the day of his arrest.
Counsel is expected to continue cross-examining the witness on February 1, 2010.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Three robbers jailed 51 years
Tuesday, January 19, 2010 (Page 31)
THREE of the four robbers who confessed to have committed a series of robberies leading to the death of a pastor of the Lighthouse Chapel International, Rev Peter Nii Addy, have been sentenced to a total of 51 years imprisonment with hard labour.
Kofi Yeboah, 30, Ebo Kwabena, 30, and Osei Prempeh, 23, were sentenced to 17 years on each count of conspiracy and robbery.
The court, presided over by Mr C. A. Wilson, sentenced the three on each count after they had pleaded guilty to the charges.
Prempeh pleaded guilty to an additional charge of rape and was sentenced to 17 years imprisonment. Their sentences are to run concurrently.
A fourth accused person, Yaw Asamoah, 30, who had on January 13, 2010 confessed to have committed several robberies in Accra, however, pleaded not guilty to new charges.
The court fixed February 4, 2010 as the date for hearing the robbery charges levelled against Asamoah.
Prosecuting, a Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mr Kofi Blagodzi, told the court that on December 30, 2009, the four, armed with pump action guns and machetes, stormed two houses at Gbawe Bulemin, a suburb of Accra, at dawn and made away with seven cellular phones, three DVD players and GH¢360.
Not satisfied with the booty, Prempeh entered the room of the victim (name withheld) in one of the robbed houses and brutally raped her.
On hearing of the incident, the police moved to the scene and observed that the convicts had operated in other neighbourhoods.
During investigations, the police managed to retrieve some of the items the convicts had stolen, arrested the sellers of those items and the sellers in turn assisted the police to effect the arrest of the four.
On January 13, 2010, Yeboah, Kwabena, Prempeh and Asamoah pleaded for forgiveness from God, Ghanaians, their victims and the family of the deceased pastor.
Reverend Addy, 26, who was the pastor in charge of the Enchi branch of the Lighthouse Chapel, was in Accra with his wife, who was six months pregnant, to attend the wedding of a colleague pastor and was due to return to his base in the Western Region on December 30, 2009 but met his brutal death at the hands of the robbers.
They were charged with seven counts of conspiracy, causing unlawful harm and robbery but they ended up confessing to murder in the court, presided over by Mrs Patience Mills-Tetteh.
The accused persons told the court that they did not want to waste the court’s time with a long trial and, accordingly, pleaded with the court to punish them severely.
Mrs Mills-Tetteh remanded them in prison custody to re-appear on January 21, 2010.
The four committed the offence in November and December 2009 and succeeded in robbing several houses in Accra, assaulted their occupants and made away with valuable items and cash.
The four, whose pleas were not taken, are also before another circuit court charged with the murder of Rev Addy.
THREE of the four robbers who confessed to have committed a series of robberies leading to the death of a pastor of the Lighthouse Chapel International, Rev Peter Nii Addy, have been sentenced to a total of 51 years imprisonment with hard labour.
Kofi Yeboah, 30, Ebo Kwabena, 30, and Osei Prempeh, 23, were sentenced to 17 years on each count of conspiracy and robbery.
The court, presided over by Mr C. A. Wilson, sentenced the three on each count after they had pleaded guilty to the charges.
Prempeh pleaded guilty to an additional charge of rape and was sentenced to 17 years imprisonment. Their sentences are to run concurrently.
A fourth accused person, Yaw Asamoah, 30, who had on January 13, 2010 confessed to have committed several robberies in Accra, however, pleaded not guilty to new charges.
The court fixed February 4, 2010 as the date for hearing the robbery charges levelled against Asamoah.
Prosecuting, a Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mr Kofi Blagodzi, told the court that on December 30, 2009, the four, armed with pump action guns and machetes, stormed two houses at Gbawe Bulemin, a suburb of Accra, at dawn and made away with seven cellular phones, three DVD players and GH¢360.
Not satisfied with the booty, Prempeh entered the room of the victim (name withheld) in one of the robbed houses and brutally raped her.
On hearing of the incident, the police moved to the scene and observed that the convicts had operated in other neighbourhoods.
During investigations, the police managed to retrieve some of the items the convicts had stolen, arrested the sellers of those items and the sellers in turn assisted the police to effect the arrest of the four.
On January 13, 2010, Yeboah, Kwabena, Prempeh and Asamoah pleaded for forgiveness from God, Ghanaians, their victims and the family of the deceased pastor.
Reverend Addy, 26, who was the pastor in charge of the Enchi branch of the Lighthouse Chapel, was in Accra with his wife, who was six months pregnant, to attend the wedding of a colleague pastor and was due to return to his base in the Western Region on December 30, 2009 but met his brutal death at the hands of the robbers.
They were charged with seven counts of conspiracy, causing unlawful harm and robbery but they ended up confessing to murder in the court, presided over by Mrs Patience Mills-Tetteh.
The accused persons told the court that they did not want to waste the court’s time with a long trial and, accordingly, pleaded with the court to punish them severely.
Mrs Mills-Tetteh remanded them in prison custody to re-appear on January 21, 2010.
The four committed the offence in November and December 2009 and succeeded in robbing several houses in Accra, assaulted their occupants and made away with valuable items and cash.
The four, whose pleas were not taken, are also before another circuit court charged with the murder of Rev Addy.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Trial of two lawyers starts January 27
Saturday, January 16, 2010 (Page 15)
THE trial of two lawyers who have been accused of forgery and defrauding by false pretence has been scheduled to start on January 27, 2010.
The date was fixed after the Accra Circuit Court gave reasons for refusing an application to stay proceedings in the matter.
The lawyers, Joseph Kwame Owusu Asamani and Ekow Amua-Sekyi, are alleged to have forged a High Court judgement to deprive the complainant, Mr Samuel Etroo, who was once a client of Amua-Sekyi’s, of his mining concession.
Counsel for the two had filed an application for stay of proceedings in the trial on the grounds that cases between parties in the case were pending in different high courts and for that reason it would be prudent for the court to stay proceedings until those matters were determined.
However, the court, presided over by Mrs Justice Adwoa Bartels, dismissed the application on the grounds that parties in the cited cases were different from the parties in her court.
Giving reasons for her decision, the trial judge stated that she had carefully studied the Criminal Procedure Code and other authorities and nowhere was it stated that criminal actions must be stayed for civil actions to proceed.
She said what the applicants sought the court to do was alien to the country's criminal jurisprudence.
According to the court, it was only the Attorney-General who had power to discontinue criminal matters against accused persons and for that reason the court deemed it fit to refuse the application for stay of proceedings.
The two lawyers were arraigned before the court on December 18, 2009 and were granted bail in the sum of GH¢80,000 with two sureties each to be justified.
They pleaded not guilty to eight counts of conspiracy, forgery of judicial document and uttering forged document.
The two were arraigned at a time the Human Rights Division of the High Court had set January 22, 2010 to determine whether or not Mr Justice D.E.K. Daketsey, a circuit court judge, could continue sitting on the case against the two lawyers.
The lawyers had sought an interlocutory order restraining the circuit court judge from hearing the case until the final determination of the application currently before the Human Rights Court on the grounds that the judge was biased against them.
However, the Chief Justice assigned Mrs Cudjoe to the case, resulting in the arraignment of the two lawyers on December 18, 2009.
In the substantive matter, the two are alleged to have forged the judgement of a High Court judge, Mr Justice Ofori-Atta, compelling Mr Howard Eric Ewen, the Managing Director of Keegan Resources, to issue a cheque for $850,000 to Asamani.
When Asamani received the money, Amua-Sekyi signed as witness, prompting the complainant in the case, Mr Etroo, to lodge a complaint with the police.
THE trial of two lawyers who have been accused of forgery and defrauding by false pretence has been scheduled to start on January 27, 2010.
The date was fixed after the Accra Circuit Court gave reasons for refusing an application to stay proceedings in the matter.
The lawyers, Joseph Kwame Owusu Asamani and Ekow Amua-Sekyi, are alleged to have forged a High Court judgement to deprive the complainant, Mr Samuel Etroo, who was once a client of Amua-Sekyi’s, of his mining concession.
Counsel for the two had filed an application for stay of proceedings in the trial on the grounds that cases between parties in the case were pending in different high courts and for that reason it would be prudent for the court to stay proceedings until those matters were determined.
However, the court, presided over by Mrs Justice Adwoa Bartels, dismissed the application on the grounds that parties in the cited cases were different from the parties in her court.
Giving reasons for her decision, the trial judge stated that she had carefully studied the Criminal Procedure Code and other authorities and nowhere was it stated that criminal actions must be stayed for civil actions to proceed.
She said what the applicants sought the court to do was alien to the country's criminal jurisprudence.
According to the court, it was only the Attorney-General who had power to discontinue criminal matters against accused persons and for that reason the court deemed it fit to refuse the application for stay of proceedings.
The two lawyers were arraigned before the court on December 18, 2009 and were granted bail in the sum of GH¢80,000 with two sureties each to be justified.
They pleaded not guilty to eight counts of conspiracy, forgery of judicial document and uttering forged document.
The two were arraigned at a time the Human Rights Division of the High Court had set January 22, 2010 to determine whether or not Mr Justice D.E.K. Daketsey, a circuit court judge, could continue sitting on the case against the two lawyers.
The lawyers had sought an interlocutory order restraining the circuit court judge from hearing the case until the final determination of the application currently before the Human Rights Court on the grounds that the judge was biased against them.
However, the Chief Justice assigned Mrs Cudjoe to the case, resulting in the arraignment of the two lawyers on December 18, 2009.
In the substantive matter, the two are alleged to have forged the judgement of a High Court judge, Mr Justice Ofori-Atta, compelling Mr Howard Eric Ewen, the Managing Director of Keegan Resources, to issue a cheque for $850,000 to Asamani.
When Asamani received the money, Amua-Sekyi signed as witness, prompting the complainant in the case, Mr Etroo, to lodge a complaint with the police.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Pastor's killers confess in court
Friday, January 15, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)
FOUR alleged robbers yesterday stunned the Accra Circuit Court when they confessed to have committed a series of robberies leading to the death of a pastor of the Lighthouse Chapel International, Rev Peter Nii Addy.
Reverend Addy, 26, who was the pastor in charge of the Enchi branch of the Lighthouse Chapel, was in Accra with his wife, who was six months pregnant, to attend the wedding of a colleague pastor and was due to return to his base in the Western Region on December 30, 2009 but met his brutal death at the hands of the robbers.
The accused persons — Yaw Asamoah, 30; Kofi Yeboah, 30; Ebo Kwabena, 30, and Osei Prempeh, 23 — pleaded for forgiveness from God, Ghanaians, their victims and the family of the deceased pastor.
The four, whose pleas have not been taken, are also before another circuit court charged with the murder of Rev. Addy.
The four were charged with seven counts of conspiracy, causing unlawful harm and robbery but they ended up confessing to committing murder.
The court, presided over by Mrs Patience Mills-Tetteh, remanded them in prison custody to re-appear on January 21, 2010.
The accused persons told the court that they did not want to waste its time with a long trial.
In November and December 2009, the accused robbed several households in Accra, assaulted occupants and made away with valuable items and cash.
They, accordingly, pleaded with the court to punish them severely.
According to them, they did not deserve to live because they had caused so much havoc on the victims and their family members and for that reason they were ready to face any form of punishment the court might deem fit.
The confessions began when the prosecutor in the case, Inspector Anthony Afetsi, read out the charges preferred against the accused persons and the facts accompanying those charges.
Inspector Afetsi had barely sat down when Yeboah raised his hand and informed the court that he had something to say.
The court allowed him to speak and, to everyone's surprise, he launched into confession and admitted committing robbery with the others.
The other accused persons followed suit with similar confessions.
The facts of the case accompanying the three separate charge sheets preferred against the accused persons indicated that they broke into the home of a banker around 5 a.m. on November 30, 2009 and took away the banker's pump action gun, a box full of cartridges, a car key, cellular phones, a laptop and GH¢70.
According to the prosecution, the four on a later date proceeded to a house at Gbawe, attacked the inhabitants and eventually killed Rev Addy with the pump action gun they had forcibly taken from the banker's home and bolted.
The four were also said to have forcibly entered the house of an auto mechanic, held his family hostage and robbed them of four cellular phones, a machine detector and GH¢160 and subjected the inhabitants of the house to severe beatings.
In the third case, the four were said to have attacked a house at Donkuna, a suburb of Accra, and robbed the household of five cellular phones and GH¢1,700 cash and shot a young man in the leg.
The four were arrested upon a tip-off on January 6, 2010 when they were preparing to embark on another operation.
FOUR alleged robbers yesterday stunned the Accra Circuit Court when they confessed to have committed a series of robberies leading to the death of a pastor of the Lighthouse Chapel International, Rev Peter Nii Addy.
Reverend Addy, 26, who was the pastor in charge of the Enchi branch of the Lighthouse Chapel, was in Accra with his wife, who was six months pregnant, to attend the wedding of a colleague pastor and was due to return to his base in the Western Region on December 30, 2009 but met his brutal death at the hands of the robbers.
The accused persons — Yaw Asamoah, 30; Kofi Yeboah, 30; Ebo Kwabena, 30, and Osei Prempeh, 23 — pleaded for forgiveness from God, Ghanaians, their victims and the family of the deceased pastor.
The four, whose pleas have not been taken, are also before another circuit court charged with the murder of Rev. Addy.
The four were charged with seven counts of conspiracy, causing unlawful harm and robbery but they ended up confessing to committing murder.
The court, presided over by Mrs Patience Mills-Tetteh, remanded them in prison custody to re-appear on January 21, 2010.
The accused persons told the court that they did not want to waste its time with a long trial.
In November and December 2009, the accused robbed several households in Accra, assaulted occupants and made away with valuable items and cash.
They, accordingly, pleaded with the court to punish them severely.
According to them, they did not deserve to live because they had caused so much havoc on the victims and their family members and for that reason they were ready to face any form of punishment the court might deem fit.
The confessions began when the prosecutor in the case, Inspector Anthony Afetsi, read out the charges preferred against the accused persons and the facts accompanying those charges.
Inspector Afetsi had barely sat down when Yeboah raised his hand and informed the court that he had something to say.
The court allowed him to speak and, to everyone's surprise, he launched into confession and admitted committing robbery with the others.
The other accused persons followed suit with similar confessions.
The facts of the case accompanying the three separate charge sheets preferred against the accused persons indicated that they broke into the home of a banker around 5 a.m. on November 30, 2009 and took away the banker's pump action gun, a box full of cartridges, a car key, cellular phones, a laptop and GH¢70.
According to the prosecution, the four on a later date proceeded to a house at Gbawe, attacked the inhabitants and eventually killed Rev Addy with the pump action gun they had forcibly taken from the banker's home and bolted.
The four were also said to have forcibly entered the house of an auto mechanic, held his family hostage and robbed them of four cellular phones, a machine detector and GH¢160 and subjected the inhabitants of the house to severe beatings.
In the third case, the four were said to have attacked a house at Donkuna, a suburb of Accra, and robbed the household of five cellular phones and GH¢1,700 cash and shot a young man in the leg.
The four were arrested upon a tip-off on January 6, 2010 when they were preparing to embark on another operation.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Oil To Benefit Ghanaians • A-G scrutinises Draft Bill
Thursday, January 14, 2010 (Lead Story)
THE government has drafted a Petroleum Bill which seeks to ensure that Ghanaians derive maximum benefit from the country’s oil and gas resources.
The bill also contains a framework to achieve local content and 90 per cent local participation in petroleum activities in the country by the year 2020.
Currently being scrutinised by the Attorney-General’s office, the bill underlines measures which enjoin operators in the oil industry to conform to the country’s laws, as well as operate within environmentally accepted limits, among others.
In an interview with the Daily Graphic, the Minister of Energy, Dr Joe Oteng-Adjei, said under the bill, a Petroleum Regulatory Agency was expected to be established to oversee and monitor the activities of industry players as part of the government’s policy to ensure that Ghanaians derived maximum benefit from the oil find.
He explained that although the past New Patriotic Party (NPP) administration developed a policy which merged PNDC Law 84 and the Regulatory Framework, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) had decided to separate the two to make it simpler, clearer and more transparent for oil companies to access and make decisions.
The minister said local content and participation referred to the level of use of Ghanaian expertise, goods and services, people, businesses and financing in oil and gas activities.
He said a key development objective of the government was to grow the economy to rapidly achieve accelerated development and industrialisation, adding that the oil and gas industry was known to contribute significantly to the strong economic growth of countries that produced the two commodities.
“It is anticipated that the development of the oil and gas industry will be a source of accelerated growth, poverty reduction and general prosperity for the people of Ghana. The active involvement of Ghanaians in oil and gas development through local content and participation has become a major policy issue of the NDC government,” Dr Oteng-Adjei pointed out.
Consequently, the minister stated that the government would seek to provide the enabling environment and opportunities for Ghanaians to benefit from the economic wealth that emanated from the activities in the oil and gas industry through the participation of Ghanaians in the ownership, operation, control and management of the sector.
Dr Oteng-Adjei explained that his office would submit the draft bill to Cabinet for study and subsequently to Parliament for approval, while broad consultation with relevant stakeholders was currently ongoing on the framework on local content and local participation.
“We are acting as quickly as possible to ensure that all these structures are put in place before oil production begins in the last quarter of the year,” the minister said.
He gave the assurance the relevant bodies in the country, including the political parties, were being given the opportunity to study and make inputs into the local content framework.
He said other legal bodies were also looking at the bill to make the necessary recommendations.
He, therefore, debunked claims that the government had not put in place any legal structures to cater for the country’s oil industry.
Throwing more light on the local content policy, a Deputy Minister of Energy, Mr Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah, said PNDC Law 84 only tackled issues on exploration and it was, therefore, imperative for the government to come up with more pragmatic measures to regulate the petroleum industry in a more effective manner now that oil had been discovered in commercial quantities.
In order to give effect to the implementation of the local content and local participation policy, these policy directions would be legislated by regulations and other such legal instruments, Mr Buah explained.
“A dedicated Petroleum Regulatory Agency, with the assistance of independent national local content committees, will be mandated to oversee and ensure the full implementation of the local content and local participation policy,” he explained.
According to Mr Buah, an Oil and Gas Business Development and Local Content Fund would be established to support local capacity development.
He further explained that the fund would be used primarily for education, training and research and development in oil and gas.
He said under the framework, sources of the fund would include contributions from licensed operators, oil and gas revenue, levies, grants and other forms of support from Ghana’s development partners.
Mr Buah said the Ministry of Energy would oversee the disbursement of the fund.
THE government has drafted a Petroleum Bill which seeks to ensure that Ghanaians derive maximum benefit from the country’s oil and gas resources.
The bill also contains a framework to achieve local content and 90 per cent local participation in petroleum activities in the country by the year 2020.
Currently being scrutinised by the Attorney-General’s office, the bill underlines measures which enjoin operators in the oil industry to conform to the country’s laws, as well as operate within environmentally accepted limits, among others.
In an interview with the Daily Graphic, the Minister of Energy, Dr Joe Oteng-Adjei, said under the bill, a Petroleum Regulatory Agency was expected to be established to oversee and monitor the activities of industry players as part of the government’s policy to ensure that Ghanaians derived maximum benefit from the oil find.
He explained that although the past New Patriotic Party (NPP) administration developed a policy which merged PNDC Law 84 and the Regulatory Framework, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) had decided to separate the two to make it simpler, clearer and more transparent for oil companies to access and make decisions.
The minister said local content and participation referred to the level of use of Ghanaian expertise, goods and services, people, businesses and financing in oil and gas activities.
He said a key development objective of the government was to grow the economy to rapidly achieve accelerated development and industrialisation, adding that the oil and gas industry was known to contribute significantly to the strong economic growth of countries that produced the two commodities.
“It is anticipated that the development of the oil and gas industry will be a source of accelerated growth, poverty reduction and general prosperity for the people of Ghana. The active involvement of Ghanaians in oil and gas development through local content and participation has become a major policy issue of the NDC government,” Dr Oteng-Adjei pointed out.
Consequently, the minister stated that the government would seek to provide the enabling environment and opportunities for Ghanaians to benefit from the economic wealth that emanated from the activities in the oil and gas industry through the participation of Ghanaians in the ownership, operation, control and management of the sector.
Dr Oteng-Adjei explained that his office would submit the draft bill to Cabinet for study and subsequently to Parliament for approval, while broad consultation with relevant stakeholders was currently ongoing on the framework on local content and local participation.
“We are acting as quickly as possible to ensure that all these structures are put in place before oil production begins in the last quarter of the year,” the minister said.
He gave the assurance the relevant bodies in the country, including the political parties, were being given the opportunity to study and make inputs into the local content framework.
He said other legal bodies were also looking at the bill to make the necessary recommendations.
He, therefore, debunked claims that the government had not put in place any legal structures to cater for the country’s oil industry.
Throwing more light on the local content policy, a Deputy Minister of Energy, Mr Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah, said PNDC Law 84 only tackled issues on exploration and it was, therefore, imperative for the government to come up with more pragmatic measures to regulate the petroleum industry in a more effective manner now that oil had been discovered in commercial quantities.
In order to give effect to the implementation of the local content and local participation policy, these policy directions would be legislated by regulations and other such legal instruments, Mr Buah explained.
“A dedicated Petroleum Regulatory Agency, with the assistance of independent national local content committees, will be mandated to oversee and ensure the full implementation of the local content and local participation policy,” he explained.
According to Mr Buah, an Oil and Gas Business Development and Local Content Fund would be established to support local capacity development.
He further explained that the fund would be used primarily for education, training and research and development in oil and gas.
He said under the framework, sources of the fund would include contributions from licensed operators, oil and gas revenue, levies, grants and other forms of support from Ghana’s development partners.
Mr Buah said the Ministry of Energy would oversee the disbursement of the fund.
Two lawyers to answer charges
Thursday, January 14, 2010 (Page 3 Lead)
AN Accra circuit court yesterday refused to stay proceedings in the matter in which two lawyers have been accused of forgery and defrauding by false pretences.
The lawyers, Joseph Kwame Owusu Asamani and Ekow Amua-Sekyi, will, by the refusal, have to answer criminal charges levelled against them.
Counsel for the two had filed an application for stay of proceedings in the trial on the grounds that cases between parties in the case were pending in different high courts and for that reason it would be prudent for the court to stay proceedings until those matters were determined.
However, the court, presided over by Mrs Justice Adwoa Bartels, dismissed the application on the grounds that parties in the cited cases were different from the parties in her court.
She indicated that she would give full reasons for her decision at the court sitting in Accra today.
The two were arraigned before the court on December 18, 2009 and were granted bail in the sum of GH¢80,000 each with two sureties each to be justified.
They pleaded not guilty to eight counts of conspiracy, forgery of judicial document and uttering forged document.
The two were arraigned at a time the Human Rights Division of the High Court had set January 22, 2010 to determine whether or not Mr Justice D.E.K. Daketsey, a circuit court judge, could continue sitting on the case against the two lawyers.
The lawyers had sought an interlocutory order restraining the circuit court judge from hearing the case until the final determination of the application currently before the Human Rights Court on the grounds that the judge was biased against them.
However, the Chief Justice assigned Mrs Cudjoe to the case, resulting in the arraignment of the two lawyers on December 18, 2009.
In the substantive matter, the two are alleged to have forged the judgement of a High Court judge, Mr Justice Ofori-Atta, compelling Mr Howard Eric Ewen, the Managing Director of Keegan Resources, to issue a cheque for $850,000 to Asamani.
When Asamani received the money, Amua-Sekyi signed as witness, prompting the complainant in the case, Mr Samuel Etroo, to lodge a complaint with the police.
AN Accra circuit court yesterday refused to stay proceedings in the matter in which two lawyers have been accused of forgery and defrauding by false pretences.
The lawyers, Joseph Kwame Owusu Asamani and Ekow Amua-Sekyi, will, by the refusal, have to answer criminal charges levelled against them.
Counsel for the two had filed an application for stay of proceedings in the trial on the grounds that cases between parties in the case were pending in different high courts and for that reason it would be prudent for the court to stay proceedings until those matters were determined.
However, the court, presided over by Mrs Justice Adwoa Bartels, dismissed the application on the grounds that parties in the cited cases were different from the parties in her court.
She indicated that she would give full reasons for her decision at the court sitting in Accra today.
The two were arraigned before the court on December 18, 2009 and were granted bail in the sum of GH¢80,000 each with two sureties each to be justified.
They pleaded not guilty to eight counts of conspiracy, forgery of judicial document and uttering forged document.
The two were arraigned at a time the Human Rights Division of the High Court had set January 22, 2010 to determine whether or not Mr Justice D.E.K. Daketsey, a circuit court judge, could continue sitting on the case against the two lawyers.
The lawyers had sought an interlocutory order restraining the circuit court judge from hearing the case until the final determination of the application currently before the Human Rights Court on the grounds that the judge was biased against them.
However, the Chief Justice assigned Mrs Cudjoe to the case, resulting in the arraignment of the two lawyers on December 18, 2009.
In the substantive matter, the two are alleged to have forged the judgement of a High Court judge, Mr Justice Ofori-Atta, compelling Mr Howard Eric Ewen, the Managing Director of Keegan Resources, to issue a cheque for $850,000 to Asamani.
When Asamani received the money, Amua-Sekyi signed as witness, prompting the complainant in the case, Mr Samuel Etroo, to lodge a complaint with the police.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Work On Oil Starts • Vessels in to build sub-sea structures
Wednesday, January 13, 2010 (Lead Story)
TECHNICAL installations have started on the Jubilee Oilfields at Cape Three Points to pave the way for the commercial production of oil and gas by the last quarter of this year.
Consequently, Happy River arrived in the country last week and is expected to to build sub-sea structures for the installation of a billion-dollar Floating, Production, Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessel.
The FPSO, the size of three football fields, is near completion in Singapore and it is expected to sail to the country in March this year.
A Deputy Minister of Energy in charge of Petroleum, Mr Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah, disclosed this to the Daily Graphic in an interview in Accra yesterday.
The FPSO will process and store oil and gas which were discovered in large quantities three years ago at Cape Three Points in the Western Region.
The Happy River, fitted with cranes, arrived from Finland last Wednesday, while the Olympic Triton, which is sailing from France, is expected in Ghanaian waters today.
The Happy River was built for heavy lifts, but it can also be used to carry forest products, general cargo and containers, as well as project items, while the Olympic Triton is a multifunctional sub-sea vessel with a large deck area and very large cargo capabilities for most operations. It is equipped with diesel-electric machinery which ensures low noise levels and low fuel consumption.
Mr Buah said so far 17 wells had been drilled, with each well containing millions of barrels of oil and gas.
The oilfields which will be developed in phases are expected to produce 120,000 barrels of crude per day.
They have proven reserves of more than 300 million barrels of recoverable oil, making the discovery West Africa’s largest offshore deep-water discovery in over a decade.
According to Mr Buah, the government was putting in place the necessary measures to ensure that Ghanaians derived maximum benefit from the oil find.
The Jubilee Oilfields are jointly owned by Kosmos Energy, Tullow Oil Ghana Limited, Anardarko Petroleum, Sabre Oil of Ireland, the GNPC and the E.O. Group, with Tullow Oil as the operator of the Jubilee Oilfields.
Partners in the oilfields will need to invest about $5 billion to fully develop the fields to pave the way for the production of oil.
Due to the cost involved in drilling and the time frame needed for the acquisition of equipment, the partners will develop the discovered fields in phases.
TECHNICAL installations have started on the Jubilee Oilfields at Cape Three Points to pave the way for the commercial production of oil and gas by the last quarter of this year.
Consequently, Happy River arrived in the country last week and is expected to to build sub-sea structures for the installation of a billion-dollar Floating, Production, Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessel.
The FPSO, the size of three football fields, is near completion in Singapore and it is expected to sail to the country in March this year.
A Deputy Minister of Energy in charge of Petroleum, Mr Emmanuel Armah-Kofi Buah, disclosed this to the Daily Graphic in an interview in Accra yesterday.
The FPSO will process and store oil and gas which were discovered in large quantities three years ago at Cape Three Points in the Western Region.
The Happy River, fitted with cranes, arrived from Finland last Wednesday, while the Olympic Triton, which is sailing from France, is expected in Ghanaian waters today.
The Happy River was built for heavy lifts, but it can also be used to carry forest products, general cargo and containers, as well as project items, while the Olympic Triton is a multifunctional sub-sea vessel with a large deck area and very large cargo capabilities for most operations. It is equipped with diesel-electric machinery which ensures low noise levels and low fuel consumption.
Mr Buah said so far 17 wells had been drilled, with each well containing millions of barrels of oil and gas.
The oilfields which will be developed in phases are expected to produce 120,000 barrels of crude per day.
They have proven reserves of more than 300 million barrels of recoverable oil, making the discovery West Africa’s largest offshore deep-water discovery in over a decade.
According to Mr Buah, the government was putting in place the necessary measures to ensure that Ghanaians derived maximum benefit from the oil find.
The Jubilee Oilfields are jointly owned by Kosmos Energy, Tullow Oil Ghana Limited, Anardarko Petroleum, Sabre Oil of Ireland, the GNPC and the E.O. Group, with Tullow Oil as the operator of the Jubilee Oilfields.
Partners in the oilfields will need to invest about $5 billion to fully develop the fields to pave the way for the production of oil.
Due to the cost involved in drilling and the time frame needed for the acquisition of equipment, the partners will develop the discovered fields in phases.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Lawyers in forgery case granted bail
Saturday, December 19, 2009 (Page 3 Lead)
THE two lawyers who are standing trial for forgery and defrauding by false pretence, were yesterday granted bail by the Accra Circuit Court.
The lawyers — Joseph Kwame Owusu Asamani and Ekow Amua-Sekyi — were granted bail in the sum of GH¢80,000 each with two sureties each to be justified.
They pleaded not guilty to eight counts of conspiracy, forgery of judicial document and uttering forged document and were admitted to bail by the court, presided over by Mrs Adwoa Bartels Cudjoe.
They are expected to re-appear on Tuesday, December 22, 2009.
Counsel for the accused persons, Mr James Agalga, is expected to move an application for stay of proceedings in the case on the next adjourned date.
The two were arraigned at a time the Human Rights Division of the High Court had set January 22, 2010 to determine whether or not Mr D.E.K. Daketsey, a Circuit Court judge, could continue sitting on the case against the two lawyers.
The lawyers had sought an interlocutory order restraining the Circuit Court judge from hearing the criminal case until the final determination of the application currently before the Human Rights Court on the grounds that the judge was biased against them.
However, the Chief Justice assigned Mrs Cudjoe to the case resulting in the arraignment of the two lawyers yesterday.
The lawyers, who wore suits, looked calm when they stood in the accused box. They were whisked away in a police vehicle to execute their bail bonds.
In the substantive matter, the two lawyers were alleged to have forged the judgement of a High Court judge, Mr Justice Ofori-Atta, compelling Mr Howard Eric Ewen, Managing Director of
Resources, to issue a cheque for $850,000 to Asamani.
When Asamani received the money on June 18, 2007, he issued a handwritten receipt while Amua-Sekyi signed as witness. The two have, however, denied any wrongdoing.
THE two lawyers who are standing trial for forgery and defrauding by false pretence, were yesterday granted bail by the Accra Circuit Court.
The lawyers — Joseph Kwame Owusu Asamani and Ekow Amua-Sekyi — were granted bail in the sum of GH¢80,000 each with two sureties each to be justified.
They pleaded not guilty to eight counts of conspiracy, forgery of judicial document and uttering forged document and were admitted to bail by the court, presided over by Mrs Adwoa Bartels Cudjoe.
They are expected to re-appear on Tuesday, December 22, 2009.
Counsel for the accused persons, Mr James Agalga, is expected to move an application for stay of proceedings in the case on the next adjourned date.
The two were arraigned at a time the Human Rights Division of the High Court had set January 22, 2010 to determine whether or not Mr D.E.K. Daketsey, a Circuit Court judge, could continue sitting on the case against the two lawyers.
The lawyers had sought an interlocutory order restraining the Circuit Court judge from hearing the criminal case until the final determination of the application currently before the Human Rights Court on the grounds that the judge was biased against them.
However, the Chief Justice assigned Mrs Cudjoe to the case resulting in the arraignment of the two lawyers yesterday.
The lawyers, who wore suits, looked calm when they stood in the accused box. They were whisked away in a police vehicle to execute their bail bonds.
In the substantive matter, the two lawyers were alleged to have forged the judgement of a High Court judge, Mr Justice Ofori-Atta, compelling Mr Howard Eric Ewen, Managing Director of
Resources, to issue a cheque for $850,000 to Asamani.
When Asamani received the money on June 18, 2007, he issued a handwritten receipt while Amua-Sekyi signed as witness. The two have, however, denied any wrongdoing.
Rokko was murdered on orders of • Prosecution alleges
Saturday, December 19, 2009 (Lead Story)
THE five soldiers who stand accused of murdering the Deputy Managing Director of the Ghana Commercial Bank (GCB), Mr Rokko Frimpong, were allegedly instructed by their superior officer to kill the banker.
According to the prosecution, the five were instructed to kill Mr Frimpong, who was said to have uncovered some fraudulent deals in the re-denomination exercise which incriminated some former top government officials.
The accused persons were said to have received between GH¢5,000 and GH¢15,000 for carrying out that assignment. Counsel for the soldiers, Mr Joe Aboagye Debrah, has described the prosecution’s case as “concocted pack of lies,” and maintained that “at the appropriate time their innocence would be proven”.
The soldiers — Sergeants Michael Arthur, Richard Somuah and Lamptey Haizel and Corporals Charles Ankumah and Emmanuel Antwi — have accordingly been charged with two counts of conspiracy and murder.
They were yesterday arraigned at the Osu District Magistrate’s Court, presided over by Mr Emmanuel Bart Brew Plange, and were remanded in prison custody to re-appear on January 22, 2010.
Their pleas have not been taken.
Presenting the facts of the case, Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Patrick A. Morkeh, told the court that the five were recruited by their superior officer (name not provided in court) at the 64 Infantry Battalion to eliminate Mr Frimpong, who was said to have uncovered the rot involving some top-ranking government officials.
According to the prosecution, the soldiers were instructed to kill Mr Frimpong to prevent the said government officials from being exposed.
The prosecution said for their reward, they were allegedly given between GH¢5,000 and GH¢15,000. Four of the soldiers, according to the prosecution, admitted receiving the moneys for unexplained reasons but not for the murder of Mr Frimpong.
It said the other one claimed he never received any money.
Mr Morkeh prayed the court to remand the accused persons, since investigations were ongoing.
Reacting to the prosecution’s assertions, counsel for the soldiers maintained that his clients were innocent, adding that he would prove the innocence of the accused in due course.
Mr Debrah explained that his clients reported for work because they knew they had not committed any offence only to end up being picked up by security operatives.
He described the accused persons as “young soldiers who have dedicated themselves to the service of the country. It is unfortunate this is happening to them”.
Counsel argued that it was strange for the state to accuse the soldiers of murdering Mr Frimpong when some civilians had been arrested, investigated and the docket on their case forwarded to the Attorney-General’s office for advice over the same issue.
Mr Debrah explained that the moneys given to the soldiers were ex gratia payments the previous government made to some security officers for their dedicated service to the country.
“I have absolute confidence that the soldiers are innocent of all allegations and we would prove it in the course of the trial,” counsel added.
The soldiers were picked up barely 72 hours after the Human Rights Court, presided over by Ms Charity Irene Danquah, had ordered their immediate release from the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) custody.
On December 15, 2009, the court ordered the release of the five after defence lawyers had argued that their clients’ continued detention was a flagrant abuse of their human rights, as enshrined in the 1992 Constitution, especially when the BNI failed to give a tangible reason for their continued detention.
Upholding submissions of defence counsel, the court held that it was wrong for the BNI to keep the soldiers at an undisclosed place for more than 48 hours without a court order and without telling the soldiers which offence they were being held for.
The five were picked up between November 12 and 14, 2009 to an undisclosed location, prompting their spouses to file an application for habeas corpus. Habeas corpus, a Latin phrase, is a legal action through which a person can seek relief from unlawful detention or that of another person.
The application was expected to be heard on December 2, 2009, but the state secured the remand of the soldiers on December 1, 2009 at the Accra Circuit Court.
But the court disapproved of the action of the BNI and said it was unfortunate for the BNI to claim it did not know it was unlawful to continuously detain the accused without a court order.
THE five soldiers who stand accused of murdering the Deputy Managing Director of the Ghana Commercial Bank (GCB), Mr Rokko Frimpong, were allegedly instructed by their superior officer to kill the banker.
According to the prosecution, the five were instructed to kill Mr Frimpong, who was said to have uncovered some fraudulent deals in the re-denomination exercise which incriminated some former top government officials.
The accused persons were said to have received between GH¢5,000 and GH¢15,000 for carrying out that assignment. Counsel for the soldiers, Mr Joe Aboagye Debrah, has described the prosecution’s case as “concocted pack of lies,” and maintained that “at the appropriate time their innocence would be proven”.
The soldiers — Sergeants Michael Arthur, Richard Somuah and Lamptey Haizel and Corporals Charles Ankumah and Emmanuel Antwi — have accordingly been charged with two counts of conspiracy and murder.
They were yesterday arraigned at the Osu District Magistrate’s Court, presided over by Mr Emmanuel Bart Brew Plange, and were remanded in prison custody to re-appear on January 22, 2010.
Their pleas have not been taken.
Presenting the facts of the case, Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Patrick A. Morkeh, told the court that the five were recruited by their superior officer (name not provided in court) at the 64 Infantry Battalion to eliminate Mr Frimpong, who was said to have uncovered the rot involving some top-ranking government officials.
According to the prosecution, the soldiers were instructed to kill Mr Frimpong to prevent the said government officials from being exposed.
The prosecution said for their reward, they were allegedly given between GH¢5,000 and GH¢15,000. Four of the soldiers, according to the prosecution, admitted receiving the moneys for unexplained reasons but not for the murder of Mr Frimpong.
It said the other one claimed he never received any money.
Mr Morkeh prayed the court to remand the accused persons, since investigations were ongoing.
Reacting to the prosecution’s assertions, counsel for the soldiers maintained that his clients were innocent, adding that he would prove the innocence of the accused in due course.
Mr Debrah explained that his clients reported for work because they knew they had not committed any offence only to end up being picked up by security operatives.
He described the accused persons as “young soldiers who have dedicated themselves to the service of the country. It is unfortunate this is happening to them”.
Counsel argued that it was strange for the state to accuse the soldiers of murdering Mr Frimpong when some civilians had been arrested, investigated and the docket on their case forwarded to the Attorney-General’s office for advice over the same issue.
Mr Debrah explained that the moneys given to the soldiers were ex gratia payments the previous government made to some security officers for their dedicated service to the country.
“I have absolute confidence that the soldiers are innocent of all allegations and we would prove it in the course of the trial,” counsel added.
The soldiers were picked up barely 72 hours after the Human Rights Court, presided over by Ms Charity Irene Danquah, had ordered their immediate release from the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) custody.
On December 15, 2009, the court ordered the release of the five after defence lawyers had argued that their clients’ continued detention was a flagrant abuse of their human rights, as enshrined in the 1992 Constitution, especially when the BNI failed to give a tangible reason for their continued detention.
Upholding submissions of defence counsel, the court held that it was wrong for the BNI to keep the soldiers at an undisclosed place for more than 48 hours without a court order and without telling the soldiers which offence they were being held for.
The five were picked up between November 12 and 14, 2009 to an undisclosed location, prompting their spouses to file an application for habeas corpus. Habeas corpus, a Latin phrase, is a legal action through which a person can seek relief from unlawful detention or that of another person.
The application was expected to be heard on December 2, 2009, but the state secured the remand of the soldiers on December 1, 2009 at the Accra Circuit Court.
But the court disapproved of the action of the BNI and said it was unfortunate for the BNI to claim it did not know it was unlawful to continuously detain the accused without a court order.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Murder suspects refused list of potential jurors
Friday, December 18, 2009 (Page 3 Lead)
THE Accra Fast Track High Court on December 18, 2009 refused a request by the two soldiers accused of murdering the Northern Regional Chairman of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), Alhaji Issa Mobilla, to have access to the full list of the potential jurors who would be selected to decide their fate.
The court was of the view that the accused persons’ request, if granted, had the potential of influencing or intimidating the potential jurors.
It, therefore, reminded the accused persons that they had the right to challenge jurors when they were empanelled and about to be sworn in.
Counsel for Corporal Yaw Appiah and Private Eric Modzaka had argued that Sections 246 and 252 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 33 (5) of the 1992 Constitution enjoined the registrar of the court to allow them to have access to the full names and particulars of the potential jurors in the case for scrutiny, but the court held a different view.
Reading the court’s stand, the presiding judge, Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefe, said although he stood to be corrected, he had not come across any statute which allowed accused persons to investigate the backgrounds of potential jurors.
He said the request by the accused persons was “a novelty in our jurisprudence” and further added that in his discretion he would balance the rights and convenience of the accused persons vis-Ã -vis the jurors to be empanelled.
The court held that much as it agreed with the accused person’s position, the law did not specify that they had the right to check the backgrounds of potential jurors, adding, “On the balance of convenience, I shall refuse the application.”
It adjourned ruling on whether or not to grant the State’s request for jurors in the case to be confined throughout the trial.
The trial judge then asked whether or not the accused persons were still in military custody, to which a lieutenant who had accompanied them to court answered in the affirmative.
A Chief State Attorney, Mr Edward Agyemang-Duodu, then prayed the court to remand the accused persons in prison custody, in view of the fact that the third accused person, Private Seth Gokah, had absconded from military custody.
However, the court held that a similar order had been made by the Tamale High Court and for that reason there was no point for him to make a similar order, especially when he had the same powers as the Tamale High Court judge.
Mr Justice Dzamefe said there was no justifiable reason for the court to make a fresh order, especially when there was no motion to that effect before him.
Hearing continues on January 14, 2009.
THE Accra Fast Track High Court on December 18, 2009 refused a request by the two soldiers accused of murdering the Northern Regional Chairman of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), Alhaji Issa Mobilla, to have access to the full list of the potential jurors who would be selected to decide their fate.
The court was of the view that the accused persons’ request, if granted, had the potential of influencing or intimidating the potential jurors.
It, therefore, reminded the accused persons that they had the right to challenge jurors when they were empanelled and about to be sworn in.
Counsel for Corporal Yaw Appiah and Private Eric Modzaka had argued that Sections 246 and 252 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 33 (5) of the 1992 Constitution enjoined the registrar of the court to allow them to have access to the full names and particulars of the potential jurors in the case for scrutiny, but the court held a different view.
Reading the court’s stand, the presiding judge, Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefe, said although he stood to be corrected, he had not come across any statute which allowed accused persons to investigate the backgrounds of potential jurors.
He said the request by the accused persons was “a novelty in our jurisprudence” and further added that in his discretion he would balance the rights and convenience of the accused persons vis-Ã -vis the jurors to be empanelled.
The court held that much as it agreed with the accused person’s position, the law did not specify that they had the right to check the backgrounds of potential jurors, adding, “On the balance of convenience, I shall refuse the application.”
It adjourned ruling on whether or not to grant the State’s request for jurors in the case to be confined throughout the trial.
The trial judge then asked whether or not the accused persons were still in military custody, to which a lieutenant who had accompanied them to court answered in the affirmative.
A Chief State Attorney, Mr Edward Agyemang-Duodu, then prayed the court to remand the accused persons in prison custody, in view of the fact that the third accused person, Private Seth Gokah, had absconded from military custody.
However, the court held that a similar order had been made by the Tamale High Court and for that reason there was no point for him to make a similar order, especially when he had the same powers as the Tamale High Court judge.
Mr Justice Dzamefe said there was no justifiable reason for the court to make a fresh order, especially when there was no motion to that effect before him.
Hearing continues on January 14, 2009.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Bishop took advantage of my problems • Complainant tells court
Thursday, December 17, 2009 (Page 3 Lead)
MS Clova Sutherland, the British woman who was allegedly defrauded to the tune of £120,000 by the General Overseer of the Vineyard Chapel International, Bishop Vagalas Kanco, yesterday stated that Bishop Kanco took advantage of her problems to defraud her.
She said she did not anticipate Bishop Kanco was capable of defrauding her because she parted with the £120,000 cheque in the belief that Bishop Kanco would pray over it and return it to her.
Bishop Kanco is standing trial at the Circuit Court for allegedly defrauding Ms Sutherland to the tune of £120,000.
He was alleged to have lured the complainant into believing that she would die if she did not allow him to pray over a £120,000 cheque she had issued in the name of her former lover who Bishop Kanco had described as evil.
According to the prosecution, Bishop Kanco managed to convince the complainant to re-issue the cheque in his name in order for him to pray over it and return it to her on a later date but he has denied any wrongdoing, claiming the money was a gift.
Bishop Kanco, who has pleaded not guilty to one count of defrauding by false pretence, has been granted bail in the sum of GH¢300,000 with three sureties, one to be justified by the court, presided over by Mr D. E. K. Daketsey.
Answering questions under cross-examination from lead counsel for Bishop Kanco, Dr Dominic Ayine, Ms Sutherland explained that she was sometime in 2003 having problems with her former lover and she informed Bishop Kanco of it during a crusade in London, adding that during a counselling session Bishop Kanco advised her not to directly hand over the £120,000 cheque to her former lover unless she had re-issued the cheque in his (Kanko’s) name for him to pray over it and return it to her.
"I had reason to believe that the accused person could honour his word considering the fact that he was a man of God," Ms Sutherland told the court.
She also told the court that she was very spiritual and normally donated between £5 and ¢50 to support church activities but insisted she was not a billionaire to have parted with £120,000 as a gift.
The following transpired between one of the lawyers for Bishop Kanco, Mr Kissi Agyemeng, and Ms Sutherland:
Mr Agyemeng: Did you tell your solicitors the accused person was to pray over your cheque and return it to you?
Ms Sutherland: I did not.
Mr Agyemeng: Why didn't you instruct your solicitors to that effect?
Ms Sutherland: I did not consider it as necessary because I was expecting a return of the cheque.
Mr Agyemeng: Did your solicitors express concern why the cheque was re-issued in another person's name?
Ms Sutherland: They did not.
Ms Sutherland, who has since finished with her evidence, also told the court that she did not report Bishop Kanco's behaviour to the British authorities because he was not a British national and did not also have a permanent address in the United Kingdom.
Hearing continues on January 8, 2009.
MS Clova Sutherland, the British woman who was allegedly defrauded to the tune of £120,000 by the General Overseer of the Vineyard Chapel International, Bishop Vagalas Kanco, yesterday stated that Bishop Kanco took advantage of her problems to defraud her.
She said she did not anticipate Bishop Kanco was capable of defrauding her because she parted with the £120,000 cheque in the belief that Bishop Kanco would pray over it and return it to her.
Bishop Kanco is standing trial at the Circuit Court for allegedly defrauding Ms Sutherland to the tune of £120,000.
He was alleged to have lured the complainant into believing that she would die if she did not allow him to pray over a £120,000 cheque she had issued in the name of her former lover who Bishop Kanco had described as evil.
According to the prosecution, Bishop Kanco managed to convince the complainant to re-issue the cheque in his name in order for him to pray over it and return it to her on a later date but he has denied any wrongdoing, claiming the money was a gift.
Bishop Kanco, who has pleaded not guilty to one count of defrauding by false pretence, has been granted bail in the sum of GH¢300,000 with three sureties, one to be justified by the court, presided over by Mr D. E. K. Daketsey.
Answering questions under cross-examination from lead counsel for Bishop Kanco, Dr Dominic Ayine, Ms Sutherland explained that she was sometime in 2003 having problems with her former lover and she informed Bishop Kanco of it during a crusade in London, adding that during a counselling session Bishop Kanco advised her not to directly hand over the £120,000 cheque to her former lover unless she had re-issued the cheque in his (Kanko’s) name for him to pray over it and return it to her.
"I had reason to believe that the accused person could honour his word considering the fact that he was a man of God," Ms Sutherland told the court.
She also told the court that she was very spiritual and normally donated between £5 and ¢50 to support church activities but insisted she was not a billionaire to have parted with £120,000 as a gift.
The following transpired between one of the lawyers for Bishop Kanco, Mr Kissi Agyemeng, and Ms Sutherland:
Mr Agyemeng: Did you tell your solicitors the accused person was to pray over your cheque and return it to you?
Ms Sutherland: I did not.
Mr Agyemeng: Why didn't you instruct your solicitors to that effect?
Ms Sutherland: I did not consider it as necessary because I was expecting a return of the cheque.
Mr Agyemeng: Did your solicitors express concern why the cheque was re-issued in another person's name?
Ms Sutherland: They did not.
Ms Sutherland, who has since finished with her evidence, also told the court that she did not report Bishop Kanco's behaviour to the British authorities because he was not a British national and did not also have a permanent address in the United Kingdom.
Hearing continues on January 8, 2009.
Tema cocaine case: Judgement Dec 23
Thursday, December 17, 2009 (Page 3 Lead)
THE Accra Fast Track High Court will, on December 23, 2009, decide the fate of Augustina Abu, who is accused of importing 71.45 kilogrammes of cocaine into the country.
Augustina has been charged with importing a narcotic drug without lawful authority but she has denied any wrongdoing.
The presiding judge, Mr Justice Samuel Marful-Sau, fixed the date at the court's sitting in Accra yesterday after he had announced that the prosecution and the defence team had submitted their written addresses.
The prosecution called nine witnesses in the trial which lasted a month.
Augustina opened her defence, denied any wrongdoing and stated that she never travelled to Ecuador, the country from where the cocaine was allegedly exported, or any other country from where the vessel containing the alleged cocaine was said to have travelled.
She said she had been an importer for the past 25 years and had, on all occasions, done her business via the Internet.
According to her, she normally ordered goods through the Internet and made payments through money transfers at the bank.
Augustina, who has been in custody since May 2009, produced documents to prove her claims.
The investigator in the case travelled to Ecuador in October 2009 to conduct further investigations and upon his return it became clear that there was not enough evidence to prosecute five persons who had initially been charged with Augustina.
The five, who were discharged a month ago after they had been in custody for six months, are Yaw Attah Nkansah, a clearing agent; Alfred Amedzi, the Managing Director of Sedco Agency; Kennedy Osei and Simon Bede, both directors of Sedco Agency, and Francis Addo, a driver.
The facts of the case are that on May 15, this year, the M/V Maersk Nolanville docked at the Tema Port with containers from Ecuador, Panama and Spain.
The prosecution said among the containers was one with number MSAU0118160 manifested to contain 1,880 cartons of chewing gum imported by Ms Abu of Augustina Abu Enterprise.
The prosecutor said personnel of the Joint Port Control Unit (JPCU), made up of officers from the Narcotic Control Board, the Customs, Excise and Preventive Service (CEPS), the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI), the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority (GPHA) and the Police Service, tagged the said container, which meant that it could only be opened by JPCU officers.
About 3:30 p.m. on May 19, the container was scanned and the image disclosed that it contained some other objects in addition to its official cargo.
During a thorough examination, two bags containing 61 slabs of a whitish substance suspected to be cocaine were found among the cartons of chewing gum.
A test of the substance indicated that it was cocaine.
THE Accra Fast Track High Court will, on December 23, 2009, decide the fate of Augustina Abu, who is accused of importing 71.45 kilogrammes of cocaine into the country.
Augustina has been charged with importing a narcotic drug without lawful authority but she has denied any wrongdoing.
The presiding judge, Mr Justice Samuel Marful-Sau, fixed the date at the court's sitting in Accra yesterday after he had announced that the prosecution and the defence team had submitted their written addresses.
The prosecution called nine witnesses in the trial which lasted a month.
Augustina opened her defence, denied any wrongdoing and stated that she never travelled to Ecuador, the country from where the cocaine was allegedly exported, or any other country from where the vessel containing the alleged cocaine was said to have travelled.
She said she had been an importer for the past 25 years and had, on all occasions, done her business via the Internet.
According to her, she normally ordered goods through the Internet and made payments through money transfers at the bank.
Augustina, who has been in custody since May 2009, produced documents to prove her claims.
The investigator in the case travelled to Ecuador in October 2009 to conduct further investigations and upon his return it became clear that there was not enough evidence to prosecute five persons who had initially been charged with Augustina.
The five, who were discharged a month ago after they had been in custody for six months, are Yaw Attah Nkansah, a clearing agent; Alfred Amedzi, the Managing Director of Sedco Agency; Kennedy Osei and Simon Bede, both directors of Sedco Agency, and Francis Addo, a driver.
The facts of the case are that on May 15, this year, the M/V Maersk Nolanville docked at the Tema Port with containers from Ecuador, Panama and Spain.
The prosecution said among the containers was one with number MSAU0118160 manifested to contain 1,880 cartons of chewing gum imported by Ms Abu of Augustina Abu Enterprise.
The prosecutor said personnel of the Joint Port Control Unit (JPCU), made up of officers from the Narcotic Control Board, the Customs, Excise and Preventive Service (CEPS), the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI), the Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority (GPHA) and the Police Service, tagged the said container, which meant that it could only be opened by JPCU officers.
About 3:30 p.m. on May 19, the container was scanned and the image disclosed that it contained some other objects in addition to its official cargo.
During a thorough examination, two bags containing 61 slabs of a whitish substance suspected to be cocaine were found among the cartons of chewing gum.
A test of the substance indicated that it was cocaine.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Court orders Director of BNI to answer contempt charges
Wednesday, December 16, 2009 (Centre Spread)
THE Court of Appeal yesterday ordered the Director of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) and two others to appear before the Human Rights Court and openly answer contempt charges levelled against them by a former Minister of Information, Mr Stephen Asamoah-Boateng.
The court accordingly dismissed an appeal filed by the Attorney-General’s Department, which prayed the Court of Appeal to dismiss the Human Right Court’s order to the BNI officials.
In a unanimous decision, the court upheld the ruling of the Human Rights Division of the High Court which disagreed with the A-G’s Department’s suggestion that it would be inimical for the identities of the respondents to be blown, stating that the BNI and the police enjoyed the same rights and protection.
The court gave its ruling in the matter after a Chief State Attorney, Mrs Helen Kwawukume, and Mr Peter Okudzeto argued for the state and Mr Asamoah-Boateng respectively.
On October 29, 2009, the High Court, presided over by Mr Justice U. P. Dery, declined to grant a request by the A-G’s Department which had prayed it to hear the matter in camera in order to protect the identities of the respondents.
Mr Asamoah-Boateng, Zuleika, Nana Yaw Asamoah-Boateng and Andrew Asamoah-Boateng instituted the contempt action against the three respondents — Yaw Donkor, Josephine Gandawiri and Stephen Abrokwa — and the A-G for preventing them from travelling outside the country on two occasions without recourse to a court order.
The High Court had ruled that it had carefully studied the Securities and Intelligence Act (Act 526), which clearly spells out the rights of the police and the BNI as the same and for that reason “the BNI cannot be given special treatment”.
The Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s decision but declined to award costs against the state.
The contempt action was instituted when the four applicants were prevented from travelling outside the country on June 14, 2009 without any court order or warrant, following which they filed an application seeking an injunction to restrain the BNI from further preventing them from travelling without a court order.
While the application was pending, the applicants claimed the BNI again disregarded the action and prevented them from travelling on another date.
The substantive matter has been adjourned to January 20, 2010.
THE Court of Appeal yesterday ordered the Director of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) and two others to appear before the Human Rights Court and openly answer contempt charges levelled against them by a former Minister of Information, Mr Stephen Asamoah-Boateng.
The court accordingly dismissed an appeal filed by the Attorney-General’s Department, which prayed the Court of Appeal to dismiss the Human Right Court’s order to the BNI officials.
In a unanimous decision, the court upheld the ruling of the Human Rights Division of the High Court which disagreed with the A-G’s Department’s suggestion that it would be inimical for the identities of the respondents to be blown, stating that the BNI and the police enjoyed the same rights and protection.
The court gave its ruling in the matter after a Chief State Attorney, Mrs Helen Kwawukume, and Mr Peter Okudzeto argued for the state and Mr Asamoah-Boateng respectively.
On October 29, 2009, the High Court, presided over by Mr Justice U. P. Dery, declined to grant a request by the A-G’s Department which had prayed it to hear the matter in camera in order to protect the identities of the respondents.
Mr Asamoah-Boateng, Zuleika, Nana Yaw Asamoah-Boateng and Andrew Asamoah-Boateng instituted the contempt action against the three respondents — Yaw Donkor, Josephine Gandawiri and Stephen Abrokwa — and the A-G for preventing them from travelling outside the country on two occasions without recourse to a court order.
The High Court had ruled that it had carefully studied the Securities and Intelligence Act (Act 526), which clearly spells out the rights of the police and the BNI as the same and for that reason “the BNI cannot be given special treatment”.
The Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s decision but declined to award costs against the state.
The contempt action was instituted when the four applicants were prevented from travelling outside the country on June 14, 2009 without any court order or warrant, following which they filed an application seeking an injunction to restrain the BNI from further preventing them from travelling without a court order.
While the application was pending, the applicants claimed the BNI again disregarded the action and prevented them from travelling on another date.
The substantive matter has been adjourned to January 20, 2010.
Court orders release of 5 soldiers
Wednesday, December 16, 2009 (Page 3)
BARELY 12 hours after the Human Rights Court ordered the immediate release of five soldiers who were being held by the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) for allegedly playing a role in the murder of the Deputy Managing Director of the Ghana Commercial Bank (GCB), Mr Rokko Frimpong, one of the soldiers has been picked up by security forces.
Sergeant Michael Arthur, was picked up at his home by the Military Police around 8.00 p.m. on December 15, 2009 and handed over to the BNI.
However, counsel for Sgt. Arthur told the Daily Graphic that the BNI claimed it did not know the whereabouts of Sgt. Arthur.
Mr Joe Aboagye Debrah said the military authorities told Sgt. Arthur's family members that they had handed over Sgt. Arthur to the BNI.
According to counsel, the family of Sgt. Arthur told him (counsel) that they (family members) visited the BNI offices this morning but they were informed Sgt. Arthur was not in the BNI's custody.
Mr Debrah said he would go to court if the BNI did not put Sgt. Arthur before court after 48 hours as was required under the law.
In the substantive case in which Sgt. Arthur and four others were released, defence lawyers had argued before the court that their clients’ continued detention was a flagrant abuse of their human rights, as enshrined under the 1992 Constitution, especially when the BNI failed to give a tangible reason for their continued detention.
On Tuesday, December 15, 2009, the Presiding Judge, Ms Justice Irene Charity Danquah, said it was wrong for the BNI to keep the soldiers at an undisclosed place for more than 48 hours without a court order and without telling the soldiers which offence they were being held for.
The soldiers, Sergeants Arthur, Richard Somuah and Lamptey Haizel and Corporals Charles Ankumah and Emmanuel Antwi, beamed with smiles when the court ordered their immediate release.
The five were picked up between November 12 and 14, 2009 to an undisclosed location, prompting their spouses to file an application for habeas corpus. Habeas corpus, a Latin phrase, is a legal action through which a person can seek relief from unlawful detention or that of another person.
The application was expected to be heard on December 2, 2009 but the State secured the remand of the soldiers on December 1, 2009 at the Accra Circuit Court.
But the court disapproved of the action of the BNI and in effect its order renders the remand warrant from the lower court a nugatory.
Citing authorities to buttress the court's decision, the judge held that it was unfortunate for the BNI to claim it did not know it was unlawful to continuously detain the soldiers without a court order.
The court refused to accept the excuse by the BNI that it made an error of assumption that it was all right to keep the soldiers for more than 48 hours without a court order, adding that "no assumption of error should be made where the rights of individuals are concerned".
"It will be a great indictment on the security forces if the court was made to believe that they did not know that the soldiers were kept unlawfully after 48 hours without a court order," the presiding judge pointed out adding that if the allegations against the soldiers were true, the gravity of the offence did not take away their human rights as enshrined in the Constitution.
It further held that there was nothing to show that provisional charges had been preferred against the soldiers at the lower court, adding that the State failed to furnish the High Court with the proceedings at the lower court which led to the remand of the soldiers.
BARELY 12 hours after the Human Rights Court ordered the immediate release of five soldiers who were being held by the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) for allegedly playing a role in the murder of the Deputy Managing Director of the Ghana Commercial Bank (GCB), Mr Rokko Frimpong, one of the soldiers has been picked up by security forces.
Sergeant Michael Arthur, was picked up at his home by the Military Police around 8.00 p.m. on December 15, 2009 and handed over to the BNI.
However, counsel for Sgt. Arthur told the Daily Graphic that the BNI claimed it did not know the whereabouts of Sgt. Arthur.
Mr Joe Aboagye Debrah said the military authorities told Sgt. Arthur's family members that they had handed over Sgt. Arthur to the BNI.
According to counsel, the family of Sgt. Arthur told him (counsel) that they (family members) visited the BNI offices this morning but they were informed Sgt. Arthur was not in the BNI's custody.
Mr Debrah said he would go to court if the BNI did not put Sgt. Arthur before court after 48 hours as was required under the law.
In the substantive case in which Sgt. Arthur and four others were released, defence lawyers had argued before the court that their clients’ continued detention was a flagrant abuse of their human rights, as enshrined under the 1992 Constitution, especially when the BNI failed to give a tangible reason for their continued detention.
On Tuesday, December 15, 2009, the Presiding Judge, Ms Justice Irene Charity Danquah, said it was wrong for the BNI to keep the soldiers at an undisclosed place for more than 48 hours without a court order and without telling the soldiers which offence they were being held for.
The soldiers, Sergeants Arthur, Richard Somuah and Lamptey Haizel and Corporals Charles Ankumah and Emmanuel Antwi, beamed with smiles when the court ordered their immediate release.
The five were picked up between November 12 and 14, 2009 to an undisclosed location, prompting their spouses to file an application for habeas corpus. Habeas corpus, a Latin phrase, is a legal action through which a person can seek relief from unlawful detention or that of another person.
The application was expected to be heard on December 2, 2009 but the State secured the remand of the soldiers on December 1, 2009 at the Accra Circuit Court.
But the court disapproved of the action of the BNI and in effect its order renders the remand warrant from the lower court a nugatory.
Citing authorities to buttress the court's decision, the judge held that it was unfortunate for the BNI to claim it did not know it was unlawful to continuously detain the soldiers without a court order.
The court refused to accept the excuse by the BNI that it made an error of assumption that it was all right to keep the soldiers for more than 48 hours without a court order, adding that "no assumption of error should be made where the rights of individuals are concerned".
"It will be a great indictment on the security forces if the court was made to believe that they did not know that the soldiers were kept unlawfully after 48 hours without a court order," the presiding judge pointed out adding that if the allegations against the soldiers were true, the gravity of the offence did not take away their human rights as enshrined in the Constitution.
It further held that there was nothing to show that provisional charges had been preferred against the soldiers at the lower court, adding that the State failed to furnish the High Court with the proceedings at the lower court which led to the remand of the soldiers.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Bishop Vagalas Kanco granted GH¢300,000 bail
Tuesday, December 15, 2009 (Page 3 Lead)
THE General Overseer of the Vineyard Chapel International, Bishop Vagalas Kanco, was yesterday granted bail in the sum of GH¢300,000 with three sureties by the Accra Circuit court.
Bishop Kanco is standing trial for allegedly defrauding a British national to the tune of £120,000.
He was alleged to have lured the complainant, Ms Clova Sutherland, into believing that she would die if she did not allow him to pray over a £120,000 cheque she had issued in the name of her former lover.
According to the prosecution, Bishop Kanco managed to convince the complainant to re-issue the cheque in his name in order for him to pray over it and return it to her on a later date.
But he has denied any wrongdoing, claiming the money was a gift.
Bishop Kanco, who has pleaded not guilty to one count of defrauding by false pretence, was remanded on his first appearance on December 11, 2009.
The court, presided over by Mr D. E. K. Daketsey, granted bail to the accused person after his lawyer, Mr Dominic Ayine, had prayed it to admit his client to bail.
Counsel had stated that Bishop Kanco was a “very respected and respectable man of God” who had a large congregation and would avail himself for trial.
During and after court proceedings, members of Bishop Kanco’s congregation vented their spleen on the media for giving the accused person bad publicity.
They cursed the media and claimed that Bishop Kanco had received the money as a gift after he had prayed to cure the complainant of a serious ailment.
A Metro TV cameraman was heckled when he attempted to take a shot of Bishop Kanco entering his vehicle. The Bishop was shielded from the cameras but the cameraman went on to perform his job.
Earlier, the complainant in the case, Ms Sutherland, had testified and told the court that she had met Bishop Kanco at a crusade in London in March 2003 where she informed him of her problems with her partner during a counselling session.
“He told me that my former partner was evil and dangerous and that he was going to kill me. He (the Bishop) said he would save my life through persuasive prayers,” she told the court.
She said she had informed the accused person that she was supposed to pay a specified amount to her former partner and that she had issued a cheque for £120,000 in her partner’s name but he had rejected the cheque.
Led by a Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mr P. K. Frimpong, in her evidence-in-chief, Ms Sutherland told the court that Bishop Kanco had managed to convince her to re-issue the cheque in his name for “safe-keeping and intensive prayers”, adding that she eventually instructed her solicitors to re-issue the cheque in the name of the accused person on April 28, 2003.
She said after giving out the cheque, Bishop Kanco had informed her that he and his wife had been spiritually attacked by her former lover.
“He gave me an oral undertaken that he would not cash the cheque. He repeatedly re-assured me that he would not cash the cheque and that the sole purpose was to pray over it and return same to me in three months,” the witness told the court.
According to the complainant, her solicitors, Parker Arrenberg and Co, had re-issued the cheque in Bishop Kanco’s name but claimed that the accused person neither showed up for another crusade in London nor returned the cheque as promised.
Ms Sutherland, who is a legal practitioner, said she could not reach the accused person on the telephone number he had provided and a further check to ascertain the status of the cheque revealed that the Bishop had withdrawn the money at the Makola Branch of the Barclays Bank on May 19, 2003.
She further informed the court that she made several attempts, through distinguished pastors, in her bid to reclaim her money but those interventions did not yield any positive results.
“He cashed the cheque without my authority or consent, in breach of the oral undertaken he had previously given me,” the witness stated, and pointed out that after several attempts to reach the accused person had proved futile, she instructed her solicitors to write to him on July 25, 2005.
She said she had to date not received any response from the accused person and, therefore, she decided to follow up to Ghana to pursue justice.
She also told the court that she had since gone for another £120,000 to repay her former partner.
During cross-examination, the following transpired between Mr Ayine and Ms Sutherland:
Mr Ayine: Do you understand a cheque qualifies as a bill of exchange, a promissory note or a negotiable instrument?
Ms Sutherland: I gave the cheque based on his personal undertaking that he won’t cash it.
Hearing continues today.
THE General Overseer of the Vineyard Chapel International, Bishop Vagalas Kanco, was yesterday granted bail in the sum of GH¢300,000 with three sureties by the Accra Circuit court.
Bishop Kanco is standing trial for allegedly defrauding a British national to the tune of £120,000.
He was alleged to have lured the complainant, Ms Clova Sutherland, into believing that she would die if she did not allow him to pray over a £120,000 cheque she had issued in the name of her former lover.
According to the prosecution, Bishop Kanco managed to convince the complainant to re-issue the cheque in his name in order for him to pray over it and return it to her on a later date.
But he has denied any wrongdoing, claiming the money was a gift.
Bishop Kanco, who has pleaded not guilty to one count of defrauding by false pretence, was remanded on his first appearance on December 11, 2009.
The court, presided over by Mr D. E. K. Daketsey, granted bail to the accused person after his lawyer, Mr Dominic Ayine, had prayed it to admit his client to bail.
Counsel had stated that Bishop Kanco was a “very respected and respectable man of God” who had a large congregation and would avail himself for trial.
During and after court proceedings, members of Bishop Kanco’s congregation vented their spleen on the media for giving the accused person bad publicity.
They cursed the media and claimed that Bishop Kanco had received the money as a gift after he had prayed to cure the complainant of a serious ailment.
A Metro TV cameraman was heckled when he attempted to take a shot of Bishop Kanco entering his vehicle. The Bishop was shielded from the cameras but the cameraman went on to perform his job.
Earlier, the complainant in the case, Ms Sutherland, had testified and told the court that she had met Bishop Kanco at a crusade in London in March 2003 where she informed him of her problems with her partner during a counselling session.
“He told me that my former partner was evil and dangerous and that he was going to kill me. He (the Bishop) said he would save my life through persuasive prayers,” she told the court.
She said she had informed the accused person that she was supposed to pay a specified amount to her former partner and that she had issued a cheque for £120,000 in her partner’s name but he had rejected the cheque.
Led by a Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mr P. K. Frimpong, in her evidence-in-chief, Ms Sutherland told the court that Bishop Kanco had managed to convince her to re-issue the cheque in his name for “safe-keeping and intensive prayers”, adding that she eventually instructed her solicitors to re-issue the cheque in the name of the accused person on April 28, 2003.
She said after giving out the cheque, Bishop Kanco had informed her that he and his wife had been spiritually attacked by her former lover.
“He gave me an oral undertaken that he would not cash the cheque. He repeatedly re-assured me that he would not cash the cheque and that the sole purpose was to pray over it and return same to me in three months,” the witness told the court.
According to the complainant, her solicitors, Parker Arrenberg and Co, had re-issued the cheque in Bishop Kanco’s name but claimed that the accused person neither showed up for another crusade in London nor returned the cheque as promised.
Ms Sutherland, who is a legal practitioner, said she could not reach the accused person on the telephone number he had provided and a further check to ascertain the status of the cheque revealed that the Bishop had withdrawn the money at the Makola Branch of the Barclays Bank on May 19, 2003.
She further informed the court that she made several attempts, through distinguished pastors, in her bid to reclaim her money but those interventions did not yield any positive results.
“He cashed the cheque without my authority or consent, in breach of the oral undertaken he had previously given me,” the witness stated, and pointed out that after several attempts to reach the accused person had proved futile, she instructed her solicitors to write to him on July 25, 2005.
She said she had to date not received any response from the accused person and, therefore, she decided to follow up to Ghana to pursue justice.
She also told the court that she had since gone for another £120,000 to repay her former partner.
During cross-examination, the following transpired between Mr Ayine and Ms Sutherland:
Mr Ayine: Do you understand a cheque qualifies as a bill of exchange, a promissory note or a negotiable instrument?
Ms Sutherland: I gave the cheque based on his personal undertaking that he won’t cash it.
Hearing continues today.
Bishop Vaglas Kanco Is Hot • Alleged to have duped British national of £120,000
Saturday, December 12, 2009 (Lead Story)
THE General Overseer of the Vineyard Chapel International, Bishop Vagalas Kanco, is in the grips of the law for allegedly defrauding a British national to the tune of £120,000.
He was alleged to have lured the complainant, Clova Sutherland, into believing that she would die if she did not allow him to pray over a £120,000 cheque she had issued in the name of her partner.
According to the prosecution, Bishop Kanco managed to convince the complainant to re-issue the cheque in his name in order for him to pray over it and return it to her on a later date.
Bishop Kanco pleaded not guilty to one count of defrauding by false pretence and was remanded by the an Accra circuit court, presided over by Mr D. E. K. Daketsey, to reappear on Monday, December 14, 2009.
Presenting the facts of the case, a Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP), Mr P. K. Frimpong, told the court that the complainant met Bishop Kanco in London during a crusade organised by the Alive Chapel International Church on March 25, 2003.
The accused person was then a guest speaker at the crusade and during his meeting with the complainant she told him the problems she was going through.
She also informed him that she was to pay £120,000 to her partner, whom Bishop Kanco described as an evil person.
The accused person also made her to believe that she would die if she issued the cheque directly to her partner.
According to the prosecution, the complainant subsequently re-issued the cheque in the name of Bishop Kanco, who promised to pray over the cheque and return it between June 16 and July 25, 2003 when he was scheduled to attend another crusade in London.
He, however, failed to return to London for that crusade and also failed to return the cheque as promised.
The prosecution told the court that Bishop Kanco rather went ahead and cashed the cheque at the Makola Branch of the Barclays Bank.
It said the accused person stopped using the telephone number he had given to the complainant, thereby making it impossible for her to reach him.
The complainant arrived in Ghana on December 2, 2009 and reported the matter to the police, who effected Bishop Kanco’s arrest on December 9, 2009.
The prosecution said Bishop Kanco admitted receiving the cheque from the complainant but claimed it was a gift.
Investigations are ongoing.
THE General Overseer of the Vineyard Chapel International, Bishop Vagalas Kanco, is in the grips of the law for allegedly defrauding a British national to the tune of £120,000.
He was alleged to have lured the complainant, Clova Sutherland, into believing that she would die if she did not allow him to pray over a £120,000 cheque she had issued in the name of her partner.
According to the prosecution, Bishop Kanco managed to convince the complainant to re-issue the cheque in his name in order for him to pray over it and return it to her on a later date.
Bishop Kanco pleaded not guilty to one count of defrauding by false pretence and was remanded by the an Accra circuit court, presided over by Mr D. E. K. Daketsey, to reappear on Monday, December 14, 2009.
Presenting the facts of the case, a Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP), Mr P. K. Frimpong, told the court that the complainant met Bishop Kanco in London during a crusade organised by the Alive Chapel International Church on March 25, 2003.
The accused person was then a guest speaker at the crusade and during his meeting with the complainant she told him the problems she was going through.
She also informed him that she was to pay £120,000 to her partner, whom Bishop Kanco described as an evil person.
The accused person also made her to believe that she would die if she issued the cheque directly to her partner.
According to the prosecution, the complainant subsequently re-issued the cheque in the name of Bishop Kanco, who promised to pray over the cheque and return it between June 16 and July 25, 2003 when he was scheduled to attend another crusade in London.
He, however, failed to return to London for that crusade and also failed to return the cheque as promised.
The prosecution told the court that Bishop Kanco rather went ahead and cashed the cheque at the Makola Branch of the Barclays Bank.
It said the accused person stopped using the telephone number he had given to the complainant, thereby making it impossible for her to reach him.
The complainant arrived in Ghana on December 2, 2009 and reported the matter to the police, who effected Bishop Kanco’s arrest on December 9, 2009.
The prosecution said Bishop Kanco admitted receiving the cheque from the complainant but claimed it was a gift.
Investigations are ongoing.
Accused request full list of jurors
Friday, December 11, 2009 (Page 3 Lead)
THE two soldiers who have been accused of murdering the Northern Regional Chairman of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), Alhaji Issa Mobilla, have requested for a full list of the potential jurors who would be selected to decide their fate.
According to counsel for the accused persons, Mr Thaddeus Sory, Sections 246 and 252 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 33 (5) of the 1992 Constitution enjoined the registrar of the court to allow his clients to have access to the full names and particulars of the potential jurors in the case for scrutiny.
Counsel submitted that his clients had the right to challenge the eligibility or otherwise of a juror, adding that his clients could only do that if they had access to the names and particulars of the potential jurors.
A Chief State Attorney, Mr Edward Agyemang-Duodu, however, vehemently opposed the application and stated that the accused persons had the right to challenge the jurors during empanelling.
He added that jurors could only be disqualified on the basis of their criminal records, potential to be prejudicial, partiality, blindness and inability to understand the English language, among others.
The Chief State Attorney said supplying the names of the jurors to the defence team had the tendency for having the jurors influenced, intimidated as well have their security threatened.
Later, Ms Penelope Mamattah, a Chief State Attorney, moved a motion to have the jury confined throughout the trial on the grounds that the case had received media hype, resulting in generation of controversy and public debate.
She said the state also feared for the safety of the jurors and explained that the case had to be transferred from Tamale to Accra because of tension.
According to her, there was the likelihood that the jury might be prejudiced by media publications and public opinion, if they were not confined until the end of the trial.
She further disagreed with an assertion from defence counsel that the motion was premature and speculative, and added that there was no guarantee that there would not be any eventuality in the course of the trial.
Opposing the application, Mr Sory said the motion had no legal foundation, because the prosecution had failed to quote from which aspects of the Criminal Procedure Code gave room to the confinement of jurors in a murder trial.
He said in any case the prosecution had failed to demonstrate that there was indeed any threat in Accra, especially when the prosecution had earlier indicated that the matter was transferred from Tamale to Accra for security reasons.
Counsel further argued that media publication on the matter had gone on for long and indicated that it was rather the accused persons and not the prosecution who had complained about the actions of some media houses.
Mr Sory stated that the court could order the media to publish only court proceedings on the matter and further described the prosecution’s application as “completely dangerous”.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefe, fixed December 17, 2009 for ruling on the two motions.
THE two soldiers who have been accused of murdering the Northern Regional Chairman of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), Alhaji Issa Mobilla, have requested for a full list of the potential jurors who would be selected to decide their fate.
According to counsel for the accused persons, Mr Thaddeus Sory, Sections 246 and 252 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 33 (5) of the 1992 Constitution enjoined the registrar of the court to allow his clients to have access to the full names and particulars of the potential jurors in the case for scrutiny.
Counsel submitted that his clients had the right to challenge the eligibility or otherwise of a juror, adding that his clients could only do that if they had access to the names and particulars of the potential jurors.
A Chief State Attorney, Mr Edward Agyemang-Duodu, however, vehemently opposed the application and stated that the accused persons had the right to challenge the jurors during empanelling.
He added that jurors could only be disqualified on the basis of their criminal records, potential to be prejudicial, partiality, blindness and inability to understand the English language, among others.
The Chief State Attorney said supplying the names of the jurors to the defence team had the tendency for having the jurors influenced, intimidated as well have their security threatened.
Later, Ms Penelope Mamattah, a Chief State Attorney, moved a motion to have the jury confined throughout the trial on the grounds that the case had received media hype, resulting in generation of controversy and public debate.
She said the state also feared for the safety of the jurors and explained that the case had to be transferred from Tamale to Accra because of tension.
According to her, there was the likelihood that the jury might be prejudiced by media publications and public opinion, if they were not confined until the end of the trial.
She further disagreed with an assertion from defence counsel that the motion was premature and speculative, and added that there was no guarantee that there would not be any eventuality in the course of the trial.
Opposing the application, Mr Sory said the motion had no legal foundation, because the prosecution had failed to quote from which aspects of the Criminal Procedure Code gave room to the confinement of jurors in a murder trial.
He said in any case the prosecution had failed to demonstrate that there was indeed any threat in Accra, especially when the prosecution had earlier indicated that the matter was transferred from Tamale to Accra for security reasons.
Counsel further argued that media publication on the matter had gone on for long and indicated that it was rather the accused persons and not the prosecution who had complained about the actions of some media houses.
Mr Sory stated that the court could order the media to publish only court proceedings on the matter and further described the prosecution’s application as “completely dangerous”.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice Senyo Dzamefe, fixed December 17, 2009 for ruling on the two motions.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
BNI complies with court order
Wednesday, December 9, 2009 (Page 3 Lead)
THE Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) yesterday complied with a court order and produced the five soldiers who were being held for the alleged murder of a former Deputy Managing Director of the Ghana Commercial Bank (GCB), Mr Rokko Frimpong.
They are also being investigated for allegedly undermining the re-denomination exercise which took place two years ago. According to the state, Mr Frimpong was deeply involved in the re-denomination exercise.
The Human Rights Division of the High Court on December 2, 2009 gave the BNI seven days to state the whereabouts and reasons for the continuous detention of Sergeants Michael Arthur, Richard Somuah and Lamptey Haizel and Corporals Charles Ankumah and Emmanuel Antwi.
At the court's sitting in Accra yesterday, the five, who were in civil clothes and had been in custody since November 12, 2009, were brought in by the BNI operatives and armed policemen, in apparent compliance with an order from the Presiding Judge, Ms Irene Charity Danquah, an Appeal Court Judge sitting with additional responsibility as a High Court judge.
The acting Director of Public Prosecutions, Ms Gertrude Aikins, who admitted that the security operatives had erred in not sending the soldiers to court for a remand warrant after keeping them in custody for 48 hours, explained that the state had cured that anomaly by seeking a remand warrant from the circuit court.
Ms Aikins said the five were being investigated for the alleged murder of Mr Frimpong as well as for undermining the re-domination exercise which took place two years ago.
She said the matter was very "sensitive and complicated" and it was important that the court sanctioned their detention, while investigations continued.
Ms Aikins said the soldiers were lawfully remanded in custody and further gave an undertaken that the state would produce the soldiers anytime it was asked to do so by the court.
She intimated that the soldiers were being held for murder, a crime whose bail was not provided for under the laws of Ghana.
However, lawyers for the soldiers, Messrs Joe Aboagye Debrah and Mr Kwaku Paintsil disagreed with the prosecution and moved an application for habeas corpus, a legal action through which a person can seek relief from unlawful detention or that of another person.
Moving the motion on behalf of four of the soldiers, excluding Cpl. Haizel, Mr Debrah said the Constitution did not sanction the detention of suspects without recourse to the law courts.
He said the state admitted the soldiers were kept unlawfully and sought to cure that illegality by going for a remand warrant a day prior to the hearing of the application for habeas corpus.
Counsel explained that he filed the application for habeas corpus on November 26, 2009 and served the state on the same day and, therefore, the state acted in "extreme bad faith" when it secured the remand of the soldiers on December 1, 2009 in an attempt to disable the higher court "from giving effect to constitutional rights of the applicants."
"The fundamental issue confronting the court this morning is whether a clear constitutional illegality admitted by the state can be cured by a warrant from the circuit court or not. That illegality cannot be cured and has not been cured," Mr Debrah submitted.
He said the soldiers were held for a record 456 hours without a court order and to make matters worse, they were not informed of their rights when they were arrested.
For his part, counsel for Cpl. Haizel, Mr Kwaku Paintsil, associated himself with his colleague's submissions and said the state must not be allowed to flout the constitution on mere suspicion and allegation.
According to counsel, the state was in contempt of court by deciding to seek a remand of the soldiers, a day before the hearing of the motion for habeas corpus.
The Accra Circuit Court, presided over by Mr C. A. Wilson, remanded the soldiers to reappear on December 15, 2009, the day that had also been fixed for ruling on the application for habeas corpus.
When the soldiers were being escorted outside the court, their wives wailed uncontrollably but their husbands consoled them saying everything would be alright.
THE Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) yesterday complied with a court order and produced the five soldiers who were being held for the alleged murder of a former Deputy Managing Director of the Ghana Commercial Bank (GCB), Mr Rokko Frimpong.
They are also being investigated for allegedly undermining the re-denomination exercise which took place two years ago. According to the state, Mr Frimpong was deeply involved in the re-denomination exercise.
The Human Rights Division of the High Court on December 2, 2009 gave the BNI seven days to state the whereabouts and reasons for the continuous detention of Sergeants Michael Arthur, Richard Somuah and Lamptey Haizel and Corporals Charles Ankumah and Emmanuel Antwi.
At the court's sitting in Accra yesterday, the five, who were in civil clothes and had been in custody since November 12, 2009, were brought in by the BNI operatives and armed policemen, in apparent compliance with an order from the Presiding Judge, Ms Irene Charity Danquah, an Appeal Court Judge sitting with additional responsibility as a High Court judge.
The acting Director of Public Prosecutions, Ms Gertrude Aikins, who admitted that the security operatives had erred in not sending the soldiers to court for a remand warrant after keeping them in custody for 48 hours, explained that the state had cured that anomaly by seeking a remand warrant from the circuit court.
Ms Aikins said the five were being investigated for the alleged murder of Mr Frimpong as well as for undermining the re-domination exercise which took place two years ago.
She said the matter was very "sensitive and complicated" and it was important that the court sanctioned their detention, while investigations continued.
Ms Aikins said the soldiers were lawfully remanded in custody and further gave an undertaken that the state would produce the soldiers anytime it was asked to do so by the court.
She intimated that the soldiers were being held for murder, a crime whose bail was not provided for under the laws of Ghana.
However, lawyers for the soldiers, Messrs Joe Aboagye Debrah and Mr Kwaku Paintsil disagreed with the prosecution and moved an application for habeas corpus, a legal action through which a person can seek relief from unlawful detention or that of another person.
Moving the motion on behalf of four of the soldiers, excluding Cpl. Haizel, Mr Debrah said the Constitution did not sanction the detention of suspects without recourse to the law courts.
He said the state admitted the soldiers were kept unlawfully and sought to cure that illegality by going for a remand warrant a day prior to the hearing of the application for habeas corpus.
Counsel explained that he filed the application for habeas corpus on November 26, 2009 and served the state on the same day and, therefore, the state acted in "extreme bad faith" when it secured the remand of the soldiers on December 1, 2009 in an attempt to disable the higher court "from giving effect to constitutional rights of the applicants."
"The fundamental issue confronting the court this morning is whether a clear constitutional illegality admitted by the state can be cured by a warrant from the circuit court or not. That illegality cannot be cured and has not been cured," Mr Debrah submitted.
He said the soldiers were held for a record 456 hours without a court order and to make matters worse, they were not informed of their rights when they were arrested.
For his part, counsel for Cpl. Haizel, Mr Kwaku Paintsil, associated himself with his colleague's submissions and said the state must not be allowed to flout the constitution on mere suspicion and allegation.
According to counsel, the state was in contempt of court by deciding to seek a remand of the soldiers, a day before the hearing of the motion for habeas corpus.
The Accra Circuit Court, presided over by Mr C. A. Wilson, remanded the soldiers to reappear on December 15, 2009, the day that had also been fixed for ruling on the application for habeas corpus.
When the soldiers were being escorted outside the court, their wives wailed uncontrollably but their husbands consoled them saying everything would be alright.
NIB requested for pre-imbursement • Of moneys paid for rice
Tuesday, December 8, 2009 (Page 31)
THE Director of Legal Affairs at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MoFEP) yesterday informed the court hearing the trial of a former Minister of Foreign Affairs and a former Managing Director of the National Investment Bank (NIB), that the NIB requested for re-imbursement of moneys paid for the importation of 300,000 bags of rice.
Mr Mark Anthony Madde told the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court that the February 2009 request letter from the NIB to the ministry also urged the ministry to exempt the bank from paying taxes on the warehousing of the imported rice.
Giving his evidence-in-chief in the case in which Akwasi Osei-Adjei and Daniel Charles Gyimah have been accused of wilfully causing financial loss to the state, Mr Madde told the court that the MoFEP decided to follow up and seek detailed information on the transaction because the ministry was not privy to events that led to the importation of the rice.
Osei-Adjei and Gyimah were alleged to have acted together to steal 2,997 bags of rice, valued at US$1,408,590, but lawyers for the accused persons have argued that diplomatic efforts embarked upon by the accused persons to solve the food shortage in the country had been “criminalised”.
The two have been charged with eight counts of conspiracy, contravention of provisions of the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663), using public office for profit, stealing and wilfully causing financial loss to the state.
They pleaded not guilty to the charges and were each admitted to bail in the sum of GH¢200,000 with two sureties each to be justified.
Continuing with his evidence-in-chief, Mr Madde stated that the MoFEP’s checks revealed that events leading to the importation of the rice had received the backing of the previous government.
He said after the checks, the ministry recommended that the rice be sold to prevent any losses and in the event of any liability, the NIB was to bear it.
According to the witness, because the ministry was kept “in the dark” in the transaction and subsequent importation of the rice from India, the ministry recommended a forensic audit into the transactions.
Mr Madde told the court that an inventory of the imported rice was carried out in the presence of the media.
During cross-examination from counsel for Osei-Adjei, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, the witness told the court that the letter requesting for tax exemption on the imported rice was signed by the acting Managing Director of the NIB and the two accused persons.
He said the government was not obliged to pay for any transaction entered into by the NIB and further stated that he did not recall the response when it was enquired at a meeting whether or not the board of NIB approved the transaction.
The witness told the court that he was also aware that former President J. A. Kufuor initiated and approved the rice importation, adding that he was also not aware whether or not public funds were disbursed during the transaction.
Asked whether or not he was aware that it was unlawful for anyone to put taxes on the importation of rice as at the time the NIB applied for tax exemption, Mr Madde said he was not aware. Mr Dame then gave him a copy of Act 758 (2008) and requested him to read out to the court, the portions which gave the tax exemptions.
He also told the court that the NIB was currently taking charge of the sale of the rice.
Counsel for Gyimah, Colonel Alex Johnson (retd) is expected to cross-examine the witness today.
Earlier, the trial judge, Mr Justice Bright Mensah, had overruled an application from Mr Dame praying the court to stay proceedings until a contempt motion filed against the Enquirer newspaper was heard.
Counsel had argued that the newspaper had published stories imputing that the accused persons had influenced prosecution witnesses to testify in their favour.
The facts of the case were that some time in February 2008 a former Minister of Trade and Industry, Mr Joe Baidoo-Ansah, initiated the importation of rice from India and in a letter dated February 13, 2008 the said minister requested the Government of India, through the High Commission of India in Ghana, to buy 100,000 metric tonnes of (25-35 per cent) broken rice.
According to the prosecution, investigations conducted into the importation of the rice revealed that provisions of the Public Procurement Act had been side-stepped, adding that the 2,997 missing bags were short-landed and diverted for sale for huge private profit.
The prosecution said it would lead evidence to prove the guilt of the accused persons but their counsel also argued that they would, in the course of the trial, prove the innocence of their clients.
THE Director of Legal Affairs at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MoFEP) yesterday informed the court hearing the trial of a former Minister of Foreign Affairs and a former Managing Director of the National Investment Bank (NIB), that the NIB requested for re-imbursement of moneys paid for the importation of 300,000 bags of rice.
Mr Mark Anthony Madde told the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court that the February 2009 request letter from the NIB to the ministry also urged the ministry to exempt the bank from paying taxes on the warehousing of the imported rice.
Giving his evidence-in-chief in the case in which Akwasi Osei-Adjei and Daniel Charles Gyimah have been accused of wilfully causing financial loss to the state, Mr Madde told the court that the MoFEP decided to follow up and seek detailed information on the transaction because the ministry was not privy to events that led to the importation of the rice.
Osei-Adjei and Gyimah were alleged to have acted together to steal 2,997 bags of rice, valued at US$1,408,590, but lawyers for the accused persons have argued that diplomatic efforts embarked upon by the accused persons to solve the food shortage in the country had been “criminalised”.
The two have been charged with eight counts of conspiracy, contravention of provisions of the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663), using public office for profit, stealing and wilfully causing financial loss to the state.
They pleaded not guilty to the charges and were each admitted to bail in the sum of GH¢200,000 with two sureties each to be justified.
Continuing with his evidence-in-chief, Mr Madde stated that the MoFEP’s checks revealed that events leading to the importation of the rice had received the backing of the previous government.
He said after the checks, the ministry recommended that the rice be sold to prevent any losses and in the event of any liability, the NIB was to bear it.
According to the witness, because the ministry was kept “in the dark” in the transaction and subsequent importation of the rice from India, the ministry recommended a forensic audit into the transactions.
Mr Madde told the court that an inventory of the imported rice was carried out in the presence of the media.
During cross-examination from counsel for Osei-Adjei, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, the witness told the court that the letter requesting for tax exemption on the imported rice was signed by the acting Managing Director of the NIB and the two accused persons.
He said the government was not obliged to pay for any transaction entered into by the NIB and further stated that he did not recall the response when it was enquired at a meeting whether or not the board of NIB approved the transaction.
The witness told the court that he was also aware that former President J. A. Kufuor initiated and approved the rice importation, adding that he was also not aware whether or not public funds were disbursed during the transaction.
Asked whether or not he was aware that it was unlawful for anyone to put taxes on the importation of rice as at the time the NIB applied for tax exemption, Mr Madde said he was not aware. Mr Dame then gave him a copy of Act 758 (2008) and requested him to read out to the court, the portions which gave the tax exemptions.
He also told the court that the NIB was currently taking charge of the sale of the rice.
Counsel for Gyimah, Colonel Alex Johnson (retd) is expected to cross-examine the witness today.
Earlier, the trial judge, Mr Justice Bright Mensah, had overruled an application from Mr Dame praying the court to stay proceedings until a contempt motion filed against the Enquirer newspaper was heard.
Counsel had argued that the newspaper had published stories imputing that the accused persons had influenced prosecution witnesses to testify in their favour.
The facts of the case were that some time in February 2008 a former Minister of Trade and Industry, Mr Joe Baidoo-Ansah, initiated the importation of rice from India and in a letter dated February 13, 2008 the said minister requested the Government of India, through the High Commission of India in Ghana, to buy 100,000 metric tonnes of (25-35 per cent) broken rice.
According to the prosecution, investigations conducted into the importation of the rice revealed that provisions of the Public Procurement Act had been side-stepped, adding that the 2,997 missing bags were short-landed and diverted for sale for huge private profit.
The prosecution said it would lead evidence to prove the guilt of the accused persons but their counsel also argued that they would, in the course of the trial, prove the innocence of their clients.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Interdiction of Ampong illegal
Friday, December 4, 2009 (Page 23)
THE Accra Fast High Court has ruled that the interdiction of the Chief Director of the Ministry of Youth and Sports, Mr Albert Anthony Ampong, is illegal.
The court also quashed an order directed at Mr Ampong to refund $20,000.
It also ordered that sanctions must not be applied against Mr Ampong based on the national security report which the court said was "flawed".
According to the court, presided over by Mr Justice S. K. Asiedu, due process was not followed and for that reason it was inappropriate for sanctions to be applied against Mr Ampong, who had neither been investigated nor charged for any offence.
Mr Ampong filed an application for judicial review challenging his interdiction, following investigations into allegations of financial impropriety levelled against Alhaji Muntaka Mohammed Mubarak, the former Minister of Youth and Sports.
In granting the applicant's motion, the court held that the Civil Service Council, and not National Security, had the power to investigate Mr Ampong, adding, "The President was deceived into believing that National Security had powers to investigate the applicant."
Touching on the President's directive to the Head of the Civil Service to interdict the applicant, the court held that the President was not the disciplinary authority and further pointed out that an Act of Parliament had vested that authority in the Head of the Civil Service.
The court held that the applicant had not been charged nor informed of any wrongdoing and due process was not followed before his interdiction and further ruled that "procedure was seriously breached".
It also stated that proceedings leading to the interdiction of Mr Ampong was unlawful and, therefore, violated the mandatory requirements of the law, adding, "Findings made against the applicant cannot hold because he was not given a fair hearing. The applicant was not treated fairly and justly."
It, accordingly, quashed the decision of the Head of the Civil Service to interdict the applicant but declined to grant an order of mandamus to order the Head of the Civil Service to recall the applicant.
The presiding judge said the court would not pre-empt the innocence or guilt of the applicant and further stated that the Civil Service Council could take appropriate action if it felt the applicant had questions to answer.
The court further held that Mr Ampong was only called as a witness at the National Security committee and not as an accused person and his interdiction was, therefore, "a breach of natural justice".
It earlier struck out the name of the Head of the Civil Service from the suit on the grounds that the Attorney-General was the proper body to be sued.
The court did not award costs against the state.
In a related development, the Fast Track High Court, presided over by Mrs Justice Norvisi Aryene, ordered the reinstatement of the interdicted Principal Accountant of the Ministry of Youth and Sports, Mr Adim Odoom.
It also ordered the Head of the Civil Service to pay Mr Odoom’s salary arrears from the time of his interdiction to date.
It also directed that the National Security Report which implicated Mr Odoom should be forwarded to the Civil Service Council for the necessary action.
Mr Odoom was interdicted and ordered to proceed on leave on July 7, 2009 after National Security had investigated his allegations of financial impropriety against Alhaji Mubarak, the then Minister of Youth and Sports, but he filed for judicial review.
The court held that "the President acted unlawfully when he directed the Head of the Civil Service to interdict the applicant. The President’s decision to interdict the applicant is hereby quashed".
The court awarded costs of GH¢1,000 against the Attorney-General’s Department.
THE Accra Fast High Court has ruled that the interdiction of the Chief Director of the Ministry of Youth and Sports, Mr Albert Anthony Ampong, is illegal.
The court also quashed an order directed at Mr Ampong to refund $20,000.
It also ordered that sanctions must not be applied against Mr Ampong based on the national security report which the court said was "flawed".
According to the court, presided over by Mr Justice S. K. Asiedu, due process was not followed and for that reason it was inappropriate for sanctions to be applied against Mr Ampong, who had neither been investigated nor charged for any offence.
Mr Ampong filed an application for judicial review challenging his interdiction, following investigations into allegations of financial impropriety levelled against Alhaji Muntaka Mohammed Mubarak, the former Minister of Youth and Sports.
In granting the applicant's motion, the court held that the Civil Service Council, and not National Security, had the power to investigate Mr Ampong, adding, "The President was deceived into believing that National Security had powers to investigate the applicant."
Touching on the President's directive to the Head of the Civil Service to interdict the applicant, the court held that the President was not the disciplinary authority and further pointed out that an Act of Parliament had vested that authority in the Head of the Civil Service.
The court held that the applicant had not been charged nor informed of any wrongdoing and due process was not followed before his interdiction and further ruled that "procedure was seriously breached".
It also stated that proceedings leading to the interdiction of Mr Ampong was unlawful and, therefore, violated the mandatory requirements of the law, adding, "Findings made against the applicant cannot hold because he was not given a fair hearing. The applicant was not treated fairly and justly."
It, accordingly, quashed the decision of the Head of the Civil Service to interdict the applicant but declined to grant an order of mandamus to order the Head of the Civil Service to recall the applicant.
The presiding judge said the court would not pre-empt the innocence or guilt of the applicant and further stated that the Civil Service Council could take appropriate action if it felt the applicant had questions to answer.
The court further held that Mr Ampong was only called as a witness at the National Security committee and not as an accused person and his interdiction was, therefore, "a breach of natural justice".
It earlier struck out the name of the Head of the Civil Service from the suit on the grounds that the Attorney-General was the proper body to be sued.
The court did not award costs against the state.
In a related development, the Fast Track High Court, presided over by Mrs Justice Norvisi Aryene, ordered the reinstatement of the interdicted Principal Accountant of the Ministry of Youth and Sports, Mr Adim Odoom.
It also ordered the Head of the Civil Service to pay Mr Odoom’s salary arrears from the time of his interdiction to date.
It also directed that the National Security Report which implicated Mr Odoom should be forwarded to the Civil Service Council for the necessary action.
Mr Odoom was interdicted and ordered to proceed on leave on July 7, 2009 after National Security had investigated his allegations of financial impropriety against Alhaji Mubarak, the then Minister of Youth and Sports, but he filed for judicial review.
The court held that "the President acted unlawfully when he directed the Head of the Civil Service to interdict the applicant. The President’s decision to interdict the applicant is hereby quashed".
The court awarded costs of GH¢1,000 against the Attorney-General’s Department.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Govt okays GNPC's position • ON Jubilee oilfields
Thursday, December 3, 2009 (Front Page)
THE government has endorsed the stand of the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) to bid for Kosmos Energy's stake in the Jubilee Oilfields and has, accordingly, contracted Morgan Stanley, a US financial firm, to value Kosmos shares.
Kosmos Energy, one of the partners in the oilfields, has valued its 23.9 per cent stake at the Jubilee fields at $4 billion, with plans to sell it to ExxonMobil. But British Petroleum (BP) and GNPC have both expressed interest in the Kosmos shares.
Reacting to media reports on the Kosmos-Exxon deal and plans to conclude it in January, the Minister of Energy, Dr Joe Oteng-Adjei, said the Government of Ghana was not officially aware of any agreement between Kosmos and Exxon.
In endorsing the GNPC’s bid for the shares, he said the US financial advisory company was currently working in conjunction with the GNPC and other partners in the oil industry to ensure that Ghanaians derived maximum benefit from the oil find.
In an interview with the Daily Graphic, Dr Oteng-Adjei explained that it was the responsibility of the government to ensure that everything was done in a fair and transparent manner for the benefit of all parties in the deal.
He said the government would not approve any irregularity, in apparent reference to Kosmos Energy's breach of the country's petroleum laws by engaging ExxonMobil without the government's knowledge.
He said although executives of Exxon Mobil approached him and President J.E.A. Mills in September during an official trip to the US, the government would only negotiate with them if Kosmos regularised its earlier breaches.
He said it was unfortunate that Kosmos Energy disclosed data on the project to more than 17 companies abroad and pointed out that its behaviour clearly violated the petroleum laws of this country.
The minister said until those issues had been resolved and breaches by Kosmos regularised, the government would not hold discussions with any company which would be introduced by Kosmos.
He stressed that no company could push the government into accepting petroleum agreements which breached the country's laws and expressed regret that Kosmos acted the way it did.
The Jubilee Oilfields are jointly owned by Kosmos Energy, Tullow Oil Ghana Limited, Anardarko Petroleum, Sabre Oil, Ireland, the GNPC and the E.O. Group.
Kosmos Energy's stake has become the target of a keen contest between Exxon and BP, following the decision of Kosmos to sell its one-quarter share in the project to Exxon.
But, according to Dr Oteng-Adjei, "the government believes that the GNPC will get the best value for Ghana if it purchases Kosmos's stake in the Jubilee Oilfields".
He confirmed that the GNPC was well resourced to purchase the fields and further stressed that "the government's supreme interest is to ensure that Ghanaians derived maximum benefit from the country's oil find. It is the government's duty to protect the interest of Ghanaians and we assure Ghanaians that their interest will be protected at all times".
He disclosed that other partners, namely, Tullow Ghana Limited and Anardarko, had assured the government that they had the technical and financial expertise to fully develop the oilfields.
The minister gave the assurance that those issues would not in any way affect the commencement of commercial oil production in the last quarter of 2010.
According to Dr Oteng-Adjei, he visited Singapore recently and the manufacture of the Floating, Production, Offloading and Storage (FPSO) was on course.
THE government has endorsed the stand of the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) to bid for Kosmos Energy's stake in the Jubilee Oilfields and has, accordingly, contracted Morgan Stanley, a US financial firm, to value Kosmos shares.
Kosmos Energy, one of the partners in the oilfields, has valued its 23.9 per cent stake at the Jubilee fields at $4 billion, with plans to sell it to ExxonMobil. But British Petroleum (BP) and GNPC have both expressed interest in the Kosmos shares.
Reacting to media reports on the Kosmos-Exxon deal and plans to conclude it in January, the Minister of Energy, Dr Joe Oteng-Adjei, said the Government of Ghana was not officially aware of any agreement between Kosmos and Exxon.
In endorsing the GNPC’s bid for the shares, he said the US financial advisory company was currently working in conjunction with the GNPC and other partners in the oil industry to ensure that Ghanaians derived maximum benefit from the oil find.
In an interview with the Daily Graphic, Dr Oteng-Adjei explained that it was the responsibility of the government to ensure that everything was done in a fair and transparent manner for the benefit of all parties in the deal.
He said the government would not approve any irregularity, in apparent reference to Kosmos Energy's breach of the country's petroleum laws by engaging ExxonMobil without the government's knowledge.
He said although executives of Exxon Mobil approached him and President J.E.A. Mills in September during an official trip to the US, the government would only negotiate with them if Kosmos regularised its earlier breaches.
He said it was unfortunate that Kosmos Energy disclosed data on the project to more than 17 companies abroad and pointed out that its behaviour clearly violated the petroleum laws of this country.
The minister said until those issues had been resolved and breaches by Kosmos regularised, the government would not hold discussions with any company which would be introduced by Kosmos.
He stressed that no company could push the government into accepting petroleum agreements which breached the country's laws and expressed regret that Kosmos acted the way it did.
The Jubilee Oilfields are jointly owned by Kosmos Energy, Tullow Oil Ghana Limited, Anardarko Petroleum, Sabre Oil, Ireland, the GNPC and the E.O. Group.
Kosmos Energy's stake has become the target of a keen contest between Exxon and BP, following the decision of Kosmos to sell its one-quarter share in the project to Exxon.
But, according to Dr Oteng-Adjei, "the government believes that the GNPC will get the best value for Ghana if it purchases Kosmos's stake in the Jubilee Oilfields".
He confirmed that the GNPC was well resourced to purchase the fields and further stressed that "the government's supreme interest is to ensure that Ghanaians derived maximum benefit from the country's oil find. It is the government's duty to protect the interest of Ghanaians and we assure Ghanaians that their interest will be protected at all times".
He disclosed that other partners, namely, Tullow Ghana Limited and Anardarko, had assured the government that they had the technical and financial expertise to fully develop the oilfields.
The minister gave the assurance that those issues would not in any way affect the commencement of commercial oil production in the last quarter of 2010.
According to Dr Oteng-Adjei, he visited Singapore recently and the manufacture of the Floating, Production, Offloading and Storage (FPSO) was on course.
Court gives BNI 7-day ultimatum • To explain cotinuous detention of 4 soldiers
Thursday, December 3, 2009 (Page 3 Lead)
THE Human Rights Division of the High Court has given the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) seven days to state the whereabouts and reasons for the continuous detention of four soldiers who are been held for the alleged murder of a former Deputy Managing Director of the Ghana Commercial Bank (GCB), Mr Rokko Frimpong.
The court, presided over by Ms Justice Irene Danquah, a Court of Appeal judge sitting with additional responsibilities as a High Court judge, gave the order after hearing a motion for habeas corpus filed by counsel for the spouses of the soldiers, Messrs Joe Aboagye Debrah and Vincent Aikins.
Habeas corpus, a Latin phrase, is a legal action through which a person can seek relief from unlawful detention or that of another person.
The soldiers, Sergeants Michael Arthur and Richard Somuah and Corporals Charles Ankumah and Emmanuel Antwi, were arraigned before a circuit court, presided over by Mr C. A. Wilson, on Tuesday and were remanded in custody for two weeks.
According to counsel for the soldiers, the four were remanded without their counsel’s notice and at a time when they (the lawyers) had filed a motion on notice for writ of habeas corpus against the Director of the BNI and the Attorney-General at the High Court and especially at a time when a date had been fixed for the hearing of the motion.
The lawyers submitted that the BNI had acted in bad faith and that its action had been aimed at pre-empting the outcome of hearing of the motion for habeas corpus at the Human Rights Court yesterday.
Replying, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) said the soldiers were in lawful detention.
However, the court, after hearing submissions from both the applicants and the prosecution, ordered the BNI to explain the whereabouts of the applicants in writing.
The matter was adjourned to December 8, 2009.
THE Human Rights Division of the High Court has given the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) seven days to state the whereabouts and reasons for the continuous detention of four soldiers who are been held for the alleged murder of a former Deputy Managing Director of the Ghana Commercial Bank (GCB), Mr Rokko Frimpong.
The court, presided over by Ms Justice Irene Danquah, a Court of Appeal judge sitting with additional responsibilities as a High Court judge, gave the order after hearing a motion for habeas corpus filed by counsel for the spouses of the soldiers, Messrs Joe Aboagye Debrah and Vincent Aikins.
Habeas corpus, a Latin phrase, is a legal action through which a person can seek relief from unlawful detention or that of another person.
The soldiers, Sergeants Michael Arthur and Richard Somuah and Corporals Charles Ankumah and Emmanuel Antwi, were arraigned before a circuit court, presided over by Mr C. A. Wilson, on Tuesday and were remanded in custody for two weeks.
According to counsel for the soldiers, the four were remanded without their counsel’s notice and at a time when they (the lawyers) had filed a motion on notice for writ of habeas corpus against the Director of the BNI and the Attorney-General at the High Court and especially at a time when a date had been fixed for the hearing of the motion.
The lawyers submitted that the BNI had acted in bad faith and that its action had been aimed at pre-empting the outcome of hearing of the motion for habeas corpus at the Human Rights Court yesterday.
Replying, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) said the soldiers were in lawful detention.
However, the court, after hearing submissions from both the applicants and the prosecution, ordered the BNI to explain the whereabouts of the applicants in writing.
The matter was adjourned to December 8, 2009.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Scramble for Ghana's Oil • GNPC ready to buy out Kosmos Energy's shares
Wednesday, December 2, 2009 (Lead Story)
THE Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) is fully positioned to buy out the Jubilee oilfields, as two giants in the business, ExxonMobil of the USA and British Petroleum (BP), are reported to be embroiled in a struggle over the country’s emerging oil industry.
The Director of Exploration at the GNPC, Mr Thomas Manu, who gave the assurance in an interview with the Daily Graphic, said, “The GNPC is fully funded to acquire the stake in the Jubilee oilfields.”
The oilfields, valued at more than $4 billion and jointly owned by Kosmos Energy, Tullow Oil Ghana Limited, Anardarko Petroleum, Sabre Oil, Ireland, the GNPC and the E.O. Group, have become the target of a keen contest between Exxon and BP following the alleged decision of Kosmos to sell its one-quarter share in the project to Exxon.
In its Monday, November 30, 2009 edition, the Business Times of London reported that as the January deadline for the signing of the contract between Kosmos and Exxon approached, the battle between ExxonMobil and BP was set to intensify.
“Exxon agreed in early October to pay $4 billion (£2.4 billion) for the quarter stake in the Jubilee field.” it said.
“The sale agreement struck with Kosmos Energy, the US firm, was done despite requests from the Ghanaian government to slow down the process,” the paper added.
Mr Manu, however, stated that he was not aware of any agreement between Kosmos Energy and any oil company and pointed out that as a partner in the oilfields, the GNPC was ready to purchase the stake.
“The GNPC is looking at Ghana’s interest first, just like other companies will look at their shareholders’ interest. We are committed to ensuring that Ghanaians derived the maximum benefit from the oil find,” he emphasised.
“If a stake in a hugely prolific field becomes available for sale, the GNPC has the mandate if the acquisition of that stake will lead to an increase for the benefit of the people of Ghana,” he added.
He explained that the GNPC was mandated by law to promote the exploration, development and production of the hydrocarbon resources of the country, adding that “and in so doing the GNPC is mandated to ensure that the country derives the maximum benefit from its hydrocarbon and petroleum resources”.
He further pointed out that the GNPC also had the mandate to ensure that oil companies operated in an environmentally friendly manner, as well as a transparent manner and in accordance with international standards.
Currently, he said, the GNPC and Kosmos Energy were in discussions to resolve differences which arose as a result of Kosmos’ disclosure of data on the project to investors which infringed on the agreement entered between the GNPC and Kosmos.
He indicated that the GNPC and Kosmos Energy “are having a constructive resolution of the data disclosure”.
“The GNPC has the mandate to ensure that the laws of the country are obeyed at all times by all companies, big or small,” Mr Manu said, and gave the assurance that those issues would not in any way hamper the smooth development of the oilfields.
He reiterated that fact that commercial production of oil would begin in the last quarter of 2010.
THE Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) is fully positioned to buy out the Jubilee oilfields, as two giants in the business, ExxonMobil of the USA and British Petroleum (BP), are reported to be embroiled in a struggle over the country’s emerging oil industry.
The Director of Exploration at the GNPC, Mr Thomas Manu, who gave the assurance in an interview with the Daily Graphic, said, “The GNPC is fully funded to acquire the stake in the Jubilee oilfields.”
The oilfields, valued at more than $4 billion and jointly owned by Kosmos Energy, Tullow Oil Ghana Limited, Anardarko Petroleum, Sabre Oil, Ireland, the GNPC and the E.O. Group, have become the target of a keen contest between Exxon and BP following the alleged decision of Kosmos to sell its one-quarter share in the project to Exxon.
In its Monday, November 30, 2009 edition, the Business Times of London reported that as the January deadline for the signing of the contract between Kosmos and Exxon approached, the battle between ExxonMobil and BP was set to intensify.
“Exxon agreed in early October to pay $4 billion (£2.4 billion) for the quarter stake in the Jubilee field.” it said.
“The sale agreement struck with Kosmos Energy, the US firm, was done despite requests from the Ghanaian government to slow down the process,” the paper added.
Mr Manu, however, stated that he was not aware of any agreement between Kosmos Energy and any oil company and pointed out that as a partner in the oilfields, the GNPC was ready to purchase the stake.
“The GNPC is looking at Ghana’s interest first, just like other companies will look at their shareholders’ interest. We are committed to ensuring that Ghanaians derived the maximum benefit from the oil find,” he emphasised.
“If a stake in a hugely prolific field becomes available for sale, the GNPC has the mandate if the acquisition of that stake will lead to an increase for the benefit of the people of Ghana,” he added.
He explained that the GNPC was mandated by law to promote the exploration, development and production of the hydrocarbon resources of the country, adding that “and in so doing the GNPC is mandated to ensure that the country derives the maximum benefit from its hydrocarbon and petroleum resources”.
He further pointed out that the GNPC also had the mandate to ensure that oil companies operated in an environmentally friendly manner, as well as a transparent manner and in accordance with international standards.
Currently, he said, the GNPC and Kosmos Energy were in discussions to resolve differences which arose as a result of Kosmos’ disclosure of data on the project to investors which infringed on the agreement entered between the GNPC and Kosmos.
He indicated that the GNPC and Kosmos Energy “are having a constructive resolution of the data disclosure”.
“The GNPC has the mandate to ensure that the laws of the country are obeyed at all times by all companies, big or small,” Mr Manu said, and gave the assurance that those issues would not in any way hamper the smooth development of the oilfields.
He reiterated that fact that commercial production of oil would begin in the last quarter of 2010.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Court adjourns state's appeal indefinitely
Tuesday, December 1, 2009 (Page 3 Lead)
THE Court of Appeal yesterday adjourned indefinitely the state’s appeal against the ruling of the Human Rights Division of the High Court which ordered the Director of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) and two others to appear before it and openly answer contempt charges levelled against them by a former Minister of Information, Mr Stephen Asamoah-Boateng.
The matter was adjourned at the instance of a Chief State Attorney, Mrs Helen Kwawukume, who prayed the court to adjourn the case to enable certain corrections to be effected in processes filed by the state at the court’s registry.
Mr Justice G.M. Quaye is presiding over the matter, with Mr Justice Samuel Marful-Sau and Mr Justice C.J. Hoenyenugah as members.
Mr Asamoah-Boateng and his wife Zuleika, were in court.
On October 29, 2009, the court declined to grant a request by the Attorney-General’s (A-G’s) Department which had prayed it to hear the matter in camera in order to protect the identity of the respondents.
Mr Asamoah-Boateng, Zuleika, Nana Yaw Asamoah-Boateng and Andrew Asamoah-Boateng instituted the contempt action against the three respondents — Yaw Donkor, Josephine Gandawiri and Stephen Abrokwa — and the A-G for preventing them from travelling outside the country on two occasions without recourse to a court order.
In the court’s ruling on October 29, 2009, Mr Justice Dery disagreed with the A-G’s Department’s suggestion that it would be inimical for the identities of the respondents to be blown, stating that the BNI and the police enjoyed the same rights and protection.
He said he had carefully studied the Securities and Intelligence Act (Act 526) which clearly spelt out the rights of the police and the BNI as the same and for that reason “the BNI cannot be given special treatment”.
The contempt action was instituted when the four applicants were prevented from travelling outside the country on June 14, 2009 without any court order or warrant, following which they filed an application seeking an injunction to restrain the BNI from further preventing them from travelling without a court order.
While the application was pending, the applicants claimed the BNI again disregarded the action and prevented them from travelling on another date.
The substantive matter was adjourned to January 20, 2010.
THE Court of Appeal yesterday adjourned indefinitely the state’s appeal against the ruling of the Human Rights Division of the High Court which ordered the Director of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) and two others to appear before it and openly answer contempt charges levelled against them by a former Minister of Information, Mr Stephen Asamoah-Boateng.
The matter was adjourned at the instance of a Chief State Attorney, Mrs Helen Kwawukume, who prayed the court to adjourn the case to enable certain corrections to be effected in processes filed by the state at the court’s registry.
Mr Justice G.M. Quaye is presiding over the matter, with Mr Justice Samuel Marful-Sau and Mr Justice C.J. Hoenyenugah as members.
Mr Asamoah-Boateng and his wife Zuleika, were in court.
On October 29, 2009, the court declined to grant a request by the Attorney-General’s (A-G’s) Department which had prayed it to hear the matter in camera in order to protect the identity of the respondents.
Mr Asamoah-Boateng, Zuleika, Nana Yaw Asamoah-Boateng and Andrew Asamoah-Boateng instituted the contempt action against the three respondents — Yaw Donkor, Josephine Gandawiri and Stephen Abrokwa — and the A-G for preventing them from travelling outside the country on two occasions without recourse to a court order.
In the court’s ruling on October 29, 2009, Mr Justice Dery disagreed with the A-G’s Department’s suggestion that it would be inimical for the identities of the respondents to be blown, stating that the BNI and the police enjoyed the same rights and protection.
He said he had carefully studied the Securities and Intelligence Act (Act 526) which clearly spelt out the rights of the police and the BNI as the same and for that reason “the BNI cannot be given special treatment”.
The contempt action was instituted when the four applicants were prevented from travelling outside the country on June 14, 2009 without any court order or warrant, following which they filed an application seeking an injunction to restrain the BNI from further preventing them from travelling without a court order.
While the application was pending, the applicants claimed the BNI again disregarded the action and prevented them from travelling on another date.
The substantive matter was adjourned to January 20, 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)