Manager charged on 159 counts of stealing

March 17, 2012 (Front Page)

THE General Manager of Mama Adesi Company Limited, an import and export company has been charged with 159 counts of stealing GHC1.5 million from the company’s accounts at the Accra Main Branch of the Merchant Bank.
Konings Francis Gbanaglo, was the General Manager of the company which dragged the Merchant Bank to court for wrongfully withdrawing GHC37.3 million from its accounts.
The accused person, who has been in the employment of the company for the past 22 years allegedly took advantage of the illiteracy of the complainant, Mama Adesi, 85 and withdrew the moneys from her local and foreign currency accounts at the Accra Main Branch of the Merchant Bank between 2004 and 2010.
Gbanaglo was arraigned before the Circuit Court in Accra today but his plea was not taken.
He is currently on a GHC2 million police enquiry bail and is expected to reappear before the court on April 2, 2012.
His lawyer, Mr J. K. Agyemang had argued that the matter against his client be struck out because the complainant was currently battling the Merchant Bank in court over her missing money but the prosecutor reminded him that criminal matters took precedence over civil matters.
The facts of the case were that the complainant, Mama Adesi is the Managing Director and sole owner of Mama Adesi and Company Limited.
The company, which deals in Rice, Sugar and Nestle Products among others, employed the accused person as its General Manager in December 2010.
According to the prosecution, Mama Adesi reported to the police that, her bankers, Merchant Bank Ghana Ltd, (Accra Main Branch) had informed her that, her Company owed the bank GHC594,332.61.00 as at November 30, 2010.
She further complained that accused person had used the documents of her warehouse located at North industrial Area/ Kaneshie as collateral and obtained overdraft which continued to accrue interest which amounted to GHC682.558.07 as at April, 2011 from Merchant Bank Headquarters without her concent or consent of any other Director of the company.
She further reported that she found the indebtedness to the bank incredible and therefore, suspected, the accused person to be responsible because the accused person left the Company unceremoniously two days after she informed him that, her company would no longer transact business with Merchant Bank and that accused should contact the Bank for all deposits with them to be transferred to the Ghana Commercial Bank (GCB). Based on her report, Gbanaglo was arrested to assist in investigations.
A search conducted in his house revealed 55 Mama Adesi Company’s Bank pay-in slips and other documents, which were all retrieved.
During the second quarter of 2007 to date, the complainant fell sick and was unable to go to work regularly and as a result the accused person allegedly took advantage of the complainant’s absence and devised means to outwit her.
Accused after ordering goods, would write three cheques ostensibly for Nestle Ghana Ltd. and one cheque for Patings Ventures, a company owned by the accused person.
He then made the complainant to endorse these cheques which she normally ignorantly thumb printed for him.
The prosecution said the accused person usually paid one of the cheques into his own company’s (Patings Ventures) account as well as used the same method to withdraw foreign currencies totaling GHC1,580,426.29.
Accoridng to the prosecution, the accused person has admitted some of the allegations and denied others in his caution statements.
During investigation, the police did not get access to Daily sales records, cash book, bank pay-in slips and Bank Debit Notes, files containing all correspondence with the Company’s Bank and Credit sales Records.
The complainant sought the services of Alex Thompson & Co, Chartered Accounts, who audited the accounts of the company and after investigation, he was charged with

I saw soldier's physically abuse Mobilla - Witness

March 16, 2012 (Page 3)

A Detective Sergeant,hasd testified in the trial of three soldiers accused of killing Alhaji Issa Mobilla, a former Northern Regional Chairman of the Convention People’s Party (CPP) and described how two of the soldiers physically abused the deceased.
According to Mensah Kpligi, Corporal Yaw Appiah and Private Eric Modzaka, subjected Mobilla to both physical and verbal abuse on December 9, 2004.
A third accused person, Private Seth Goka, is currently on the run.
Led by a Chief State Attorney, Ms Penelope Marmattah, to testify, the witness told the court that Appiah, apart from subjecting Mobilla to verbal abuse, ordered Mobilla to suspend with both hands on the ground with legs in the air.
He said Modzaka used a nim tree stick to hit Mobilla’s chest several times but he was challenged by counsel for the accused persons, Mr Thaddeus Sory of making up false stories.
According to the witness, he could not state his evidence in his earlier statements because he had been intimidated and demoted by his former boss.
The witness said an alibi put up by Modzaka also turned out to be false.
The following transpired between Mr Sory and Mr Kpligi during cross examination:
Mr Sory: Did you know how old Mobilla was at the time of his death?
Mr Kpligi: Yes my Lord. He was 50 years.
Mr Sory: I am telling you that with Mobilla’s age, he had to be tied against an object to be able to stay in that position.
Mr Kpligi: He was not tied but he was able to take it.
The presiding judge, Mr Justice Mustapha Habib Logoh, adjourned sitting to March 16, 2012 to enable Mr Sory to continue with his cross examination.
At its last sitting, the Accra Fast Track High Court granted leave to the prosecution to file additional evidence in the matter.
Alhaji Mobilla was arrested by the police on December 9, 2004 for allegedly supplying the youth in Tamale with guns to foment trouble.
While in custody, the police claimed they received information that his followers and sympathisers were mobilising to free him.
Mobilla 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 in military custody three hours after he had been handed over to the accused persons, who were on duty that day.
The pathologist’s report revealed that Alhaji Mobilla was sent to the hospital dead and that he died from multiple wounds.

Owusu Bempah's sympathisers dribbled - As police fail to arraign him

March 16, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)

SYMPATHISERS of the Director of Operations of Friends of Nana Konadu Agyemang Rawlings (FONKAR), Ernest Owusu Bempah, were today disappointed when security operatives failed to arraign Bempah before the Osu District Magistrate’s Court.
Scores of sympathisers mostly members of FONKAR, reporters and lawyers thronged the court premises before 9.00 a.m. with prior knowledge that Bempah was to be arraigned before the court for publishing false news.
Bempah, was picked up by officials of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) on Wednesday, March 14, 2012 for questioning on his claims that the First Lady, Mrs. Ernestina Naadu Mills had allegedly received $5 million from a businessman, Mr Alfred Agbesi Woyome.
News trickled in earlier in the day that Bempah was likely to be arraigned before court charged with publishing false news with the intent to cause fear and panic.
His sympathisers, therefore, decided to form groups and wait at the various courts in the event that their hero is arraigned before any of the courts.
However, Bempah’s sympathisers left the court disappointed after the court clerk announced around 1:30 p.m. that the court had officially closed for the day.
Some left the court premises immediately looking visibly disappointed while others hanged around with the hope Bempah might be brought.
One of the sympathisers walked away saying he will be at the court premises daily until Bempah was brought.
Reporters and pockets of supporters who hanged around however eventually gave up waiting after it became evident Bempah would not be arraigned at that particular moment.
Bempah’s lawyers told reporters they were yet to make contact with their client.
They also expressed disappointment after waiting endlessly for the arrival of their client in court.

Retiring age of State Attorneys - Court to decide on April 12

March 15, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)

THE Accra Fast Track High Court will on April 12, 2012 decide whether or not to refer the issue on the retirement age of State Attorneys to the Supreme Court for interpretation.
The court’s decision will have a bearing on the locus of a Chief State Attorney, Mr. Anthony Gyambiby, who is being challenged as not being eligible to continue prosecuting a criminal case against a former Minister of Information and eight others others on the grounds that he had attained the compulsory retirement age of 60.
The defence team had argued that Mr. Gyambiby had no locus to continue prosecuting the case because he had attained the compulsory retirement age of 60 and had no authorization to continue with the case.
The court, presided over by Mr. Justice Charles Quist fixed the date after defence and the state’s legal team had argued their cases.
A former Minister of Information, Stephen Asamoah-Boateng, his wife, Zuleika and seven others have been charged with conspiracy to defraud the State.
Other accused persons are Kofi Asamoah-Boateng, former Director of Finance, Ministry of Information and National Orientation, Frank Agyekum, a Former Deputy Minister of Information and National Orientation, Dominic A. Sampong, Former Acting Chief Director, Ministry of Information and National Orientation, Kwabena Denkyira, a Deputy Director of Finance and Administration of the Ministry, Prosper Arku of Supreme Procurement Agencies Limited and Yasmine Domua, a businesswoman.
Also in court is Supreme Procurement Agencies Limited, an entity.
The accused persons are alleged to have conspired to defraud the State of GHC86,915.85 in renovation works undertaken at the Ministerial Block of the Ministry during Asamoah-Boateng’s tenure in office.
They have all pleaded not guilty and admitted to GHC10,000 bail each with a surety.
An affidavit in support of the motion challenging the retention of Mr. Gyambiby as the prosecutor in the case and sworn by Mr D.A.Y. Sampong, the fifth accused person in the case, said Mr Gyambiby was born on November 28, 1947 in Ghana.
Sampong said the prosecutor was 64 years old and that in 2007, Mr Gyambiby attained the age of 60 and therefore retired from public service.
He stated that Mr Gyambiby could be engaged on contract basis by the Ministry of Justice and Attorney General’s Department through the Public Service Commission as a Consultant or contractor based on contract but not as a Chief State Attorney.
The accused person said Mr. Gyambiby ought to have indicated to the court that
he was on contract and ought to have shown the court the contract from
the Public Service Commission before prosecuting the matter.
He further deposed that Mr. Gyambiby ought to show the court his four years contract
documents to indicate his capacity to appear before the court and prosecute since he had attained age 60.
The fifth accused person said Mr Gyambiby could only be appointed as a consultant in the office and not as a private prosecutor.

Arguing for the state, a Principal State Attorney, Mr. Anthony Rexford Wiredu, Gyambiby attained the age sixty on November 28, 2007 and during that period he had an accrued right which was automatic to continue prosecution to the age of 65.

“It was only in September 2010 that the Legal Service Board said an Attorney who needed re-engagement must apply. Until then it was not done. Mr. Gyambiby was already continuing his service as it was the practice before and so was not affected by the decision and therefore, had the accrued right to continue prosecution,” Mr Wiredu argued.

Mr. Wiredu pointed out that PNDC Law 320 gave Mr Gyambiby the mandate to retire at age 65 in the same vain as a High Court judge.

On the issue of the letter written to the court by a former Attorney-General, Mr. Martin Amidu on January 9, 2012, asking that Mr. Gyambiby should continue prosecuting the case, Mr. Wiredu explained the A-G had the authority not in person but the office to appoint lawyers even by word of mouth to represent the state in court.

“Mr Gyambiby has the authority of the A-G and the Legal Service Board to prosecute cases assigned to him through the Director of Public Prosecutions. It does not lie in anybody’s mouth to ask Mr. Gyambiby to produce a re-engagement letter,” Mr. Wiredu argued.
Counsel for Sampong, Mr Augustines Obour, then prayed to refer the issue on the retirement age of a State Attorney to the Supreme Court for interpretation.

Businesswoman drags Merchant Bank to court - For fraudulent withdrawals

March 13, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)

AN OCTAGENARIAN has dragged the Merchant Bank to the Commercial Division of the Fast Track High Court for wrongfully withdrawing GHC37,315,106.45 from her account.
According to Mama Adesi, 85, who sued on behalf of her company Mama Adesi Company Limited, the Accra Main Branch of the bank took advantage of her stark illiteracy and withdrew the amount from her accounts without her knowledge and authorization.
She also accused the bank of debiting her account several times but the bank failed to show the recipients of the moneys adding “the habitual debiting of plaintiff’s accounts without the signature of any recipient made such debits void and of no effect.”
The bank has also been accused of honouring withdrawals from the various accounts of the plaintiff on the basis of word-processed letters which were very often dated by hand, amidst alteration of account numbers in pen without any endorsement by the plaintiff made all those transactions null and void.
The plaintiff, who detected the wrongful withdrawal of the money after she had engaged auditors to audit her company’s accounts is accusing the bank of exercising lack of good faith, due care and best banking practices.
A statement of claim filed on behalf the plaintiff by her lawyer, Mr Kwabla Senanu, argued that because of the plaintiff’s illiteracy, the bank made her aware that anytime she wished to withdraw cash to satisfy any need for foreign exchange, she would thumbprint twice on the face of the each cheque and endorse it again by thumbprinting it at the back.
“Accordingly, the plaintiff was issued with cheque books for both cedis and foreign cash withdrawals, but the defendant reneged on all of these to run down the colossal credit balances on the accounts of the plaintiff,” the statement of claim accompanying the writ pointed out.
A writ of summons filed on her behalf by Mr Senanu, is accordingly praying the court to order the bank to pay forthwith to the plaintiff various sums of monies proven as having been withdrawn wrongfully from plaintiff’s various accounts for almost two decades.
It also praying the court to order the bank to refund all amounts of money for which it had no legitimate authorization to withdraw.
The plaintiff is further claiming among others a refund of all interests charged on the withdrawn amount, an order cancelling any loans/overdrafts purportedly granted to plaintiff by the defendant as well as grant general damages and costs.
A statement of claim accompanying the writ of summons stated that the plaintiff’s company, which deals in import and export of goods has been dealing with the bank for the past two decades with eight separate accounts; both in local and foreign currencies.
In March 2011, the plaintiff’s auditors detected the running down of plaintiff’s accounts by the bank.
The auditors found that the bank withdrew various sums of money from the plaintiff’s foreign and local currency accounts between January 22, 2004 and July 16, 2010.

According to the statement of claim, the documents including letters used for the withdrawals were devoid of authority to warrant the payments of those moneys from the plaintiff’s accounts.
It further argued that the defendant took advantage of the plaintiff’s illiteracy to “surreptitiously procure her consent for an overdraft only to gleefully spirit away the overdraft facility through withdrawals not approved of or endorsed by the plaintiff as the sole signatory to the accounts.”
It said the quantum of withdrawals and the rapidity with which the defective withdrawals and banking transactions involving huge sums of cash and were carried out made such transactions null and void.
The statement of claim stated that despite several written demands requesting for plaintiff’s statement of accounts from the period of January 1, 2000 and December 31 2010, the defendant has failed to heed to plaintiff’s request to enable the plaintiff to know the extent to which the bank had wrongfully withdrawn her money.
She also denied owing the bank GHC594,332 and any accruing interest thereon.
The defendant has entered appearance but yet to file its defence in the matter.

Lands C'ssion gutted by fire - Committee to investigate

March 2, 2012 (Lead story)

THE Lands Commission has constituted a committee to investigate the cause of fire outbreak at its premises early this morning.
The committee is expected to make recommendations for appropriate action to avoid any future occurrence.
Members of the committee will be drawn from the Ghana National Fire Service (GNFS), the Ghana Police Service, the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF), the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) and the Public Records and Archives Administration.
The rest of the members are from the Lands Commission, the Land Valuation Division, the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources.
At a press briefing in Accra on March 1, 2012, the Chairman of the Lands Commission, Nana Adjei Ampofo, told reporters that the various stakeholders were yet to nominate persons to represent their respective organisations.
Nana Ampofo urged the public to remain calm and not to panic about the safety of their documents which were in the custody of the Commission.
He also stated that the Commission had begun the process to digitize its records before the fire outbreak adding that the Commission’s office was opened for normal business.
Sections of the head office of the Lands Commission at Cantonments in Accra were early this morning reduced to wreckage as fire swept through the Public and Vested Lands Management Division and the Survey and Mapping Division including Accounts, State Lands Registry, Library, Internal Audit, Conference Room and Survey Director’s office.
Thousands of vital documents which were housed in these offices were destroyed by the fire which began at 5 a.m.
The raging fire left in its wake burnt vital documents, total black out at the entire Lands Commission, idle and heartbroken workers who had no office to operate from, visibly shaken government officials and worried members of the public who feared they might have lost vital documents.
Work also grounded to a halt at other departments not affected by the fire outbreak because of the total black out. Officials were not certain when electricity would be restored for work to resume.
A woman collapsed and was rushed to seek medical attention. A young lady, who stood among bewildered staff of the Commission openly cried when she realized there was nothing to salvage.
It took seven fire tenders, six from the Ghana National Fire Service (GNFS) and one from the Ghana Armed Forces and approximately four hours to bring the fire under total control.
Several files, computers and accessories, tables, chairs and electrical appliances among many others were reduced to rubble.
The entire premise of the Lands Commission was engulfed in thick smoke when the Daily Graphic, officials of the Lands Commission and other members of the public got to the scene around 5:40 a.m.
Policemen were dispatched to maintain law and order as well as prevent any person from taking undue advantage of the situation.
Both entries to the Commission were closed to the public. A security man was kept at post to ward off intruders and teeming members of the public. Scores of people observed the incident from outside.
A turntable ladder from the GNFS was used to control the fire from raging through the ceiling to other offices. Some of the workers whose offices had been destroyed managed to get over their shock and began taking photographs of the ruins. Others also formed groups and discussed the incident.
As at 1.00 p.m., some members of staff, who had no office to operate from sat under trees reading newspapers. Officials of the Commission were also locked up in a meeting for several hours discussing the next line of action to be taken for normal work to resume.
The security man on duty informed reporters that he detected the fire at 4:57 a.m. from the file room but was silent on the action he took to contain it.
According to the Deputy Regional Commander of the GNFS, Mr Peter Donkor, a Fire Officer on his way to work detected smoke from one of the ceilings of the Lands Commission and quickly alerted the office which rushed to the scene at exactly 5:20 a.m.
He said the immediate cause of the fire was unknown but indicated investigations were ongoing to ascertain the cause of the fire.
Also present at the scene were the Minister of Lands and Natural Resources, Mr Mike Hammah, the National Chairman of the Lands Commission, Nana Adjei Ampofo, the Greater Accra Regional Chairman of the Lands Commission, Oko Nikoi Dzani, the Mayor of Accra, Alfred Vanderpuje and the Executive Secretary of the Lands Commission, Dr Odami Larbi.
Each of the officials looked shocked upon seeing the damage. Mr Hammah was particularly shaken and close to tears when he visited the scene.
He shook his head several times when he went round to observe the extent of damage.
Mr Dzani allayed the fears of the public and gave the assurance that there was back-up to all files.
He said documents on state, individual and stool land lands could be recovered and further stated that the Commission would later take stock and know the exact quantum of damage.
On his part, Mr Hammah, explained that the government would wait for investigations to be completed before concrete action would be taken on the unfortunate incident.
He, therefore, called for thorough investigations into the cause of the fire.
The fire tenders drove off at exactly 9:16 a.m. after they had put out the fire completely.

Court rules on Jake's purchase of bungalow May 9

March 2, 2012 (Page 3)

The Supreme Court will on May 9, 2012 decide whether or not to evict Mr Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey, the current Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) from government bungalows.
The court fixed the date after parties in the matter had announced to the court that they did not have new issues to file in connection with the case.
A Deputy-Minister of Information, Mr Samuel Okudzeto-Ablakwa and a Deputy Minister of Youth and Sports, Dr Omane Boamah dragged Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey to the highest court of the land over his purchase of a government bungalow in Accra.
The panel to decide the fate of Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey is presided over by Mr Justice William Atuguba with Ms Justice Sophia Akuffo, Mr Justice S. A. Brobbey, Mr Justice Julius Ansah, Mrs Justice Sophia Adinyira, Ms Justice Rose Owusu, Mr Justice Jones Dotse, Mr Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie and Mrs Justice Vida Akoto-Bamfo as members.
Those representing parties in the case are Mr Kwabla Senanu for the applicants, Mr R.O. Solomon represented Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey while Dr Benjamin Kunbuor, the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice represented the state.
The applicants were present but Mr Obstsebi-Lamptey was absent.

In November 2011, the court dismissed Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey’s preliminary objection which argued that the court had no mandate to hear a case brought before it by the applicants in respect of his right to purchase a government bungalow.

The nine-member court, in a unanimous decision, argued that, although, the case passed for a land case, which falls within the domain of the High Court, the plaintiffs were not laying claim to the property in question but rather seeking an interpretation of several provisions of the Constitution regarding the ownership of state property, including Articles 20 (5) and 20 (6) of the 1992 Constitution.

Presided over by Mr Justice William Atuguba, the court agreed that it had jurisdiction by law and precedents to hear the case which bordered both on constitutionality and public interest.

Other members of the court were Ms Justice Sophia Akuffo, Mr Justice S. A. Brobbey, Mrs Justice Sophia Adinyira, Mrs Justice Rose Owusu, Mr Justice Jones Dotse, Mr Justice Baffoe Bonnie, Mr Justice B.T. Aryeetey and Mrs Justice Vida Akoto Bamfo.
However, Mr. Justice Ansah later replaced Mr Justice Aryeetey.
In 2008, Mr Ablakwa and Dr. Boamah, Deputy Ministers of Information and Environment, Science and Technology respectively, brought the action against Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey, who was then the Minister of Tourism and National Orientation, seeking a declaration from the court that he had no right to buy the bungalow at No 2 Mungo Street in the Ridge residential area he was occupying at the time.

The plaintiffs had argued that the action of Mr Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey contravened Articles 20 (5) and 20 (6) and smacked of cronyism and gross abuse of discretional powers of a public officer.

However, Mr Obetsebi-Lamptey raised a preliminary objection, saying the court had no mandate to hear the case.

His argument was that the right procedure was for the plaintiffs to apply to the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), if they thought he was abusing his office by applying to purchase the bungalow.
However, the Supreme Court held otherwise and accordingly dismissed the case.

Speaker's name struck out in retired journalist's suit

March 1, 2012 (Page 19)

THE Supreme Court has struck out the name of the Speaker Parliament from a suit instituted by a retired journalist who is challenging the creation of additional 42 districts across the country.
Welford Quarcoo, is praying the Supreme Court to declare the creation of the new districts as null and void on the grounds that Section 1 (2) of the Local Government Act, 1993 (Act 462) which mandated the President to declare an area a district and assign a name to that district by Executive Instrument was inconsistent with Article 241 (2) and 106 (1) of the 1992 Constitution and consequently void.
The plaintiff sued the Attorney-General, The Speaker of Parliament and the Electoral Commission but the nine member panel unanimously struck out the name of the Speaker of Parliament.
According to the court, presided over by Mr Justice William, the name of the Speaker of Parliament was improperly joined in the suit because the Attorney-General was a nominal defendant for arms of the state.
Other members of the panel were Ms Justice Sophia Akuffo, Professor Justice S. K. Date-Bah, Ms Justice Rose Owusu, Mr Justice Annin Yeboah, Mr Justice G. S. Gbadegbe and Mrs Justice Vida Akoto-Bamfo.
The court also gave counsel for the applicant, Mr Bright Okyere-Agyekum to file additional issues in a supplement affidavit.
The matter was adjourned to March 14, 2012 to enable the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mr Benjamin Kunbuor, who was present in court to serve the state’s affidavit in opposition on the applicant.
In addition to the substantive suit, the applicant has filed an interlocutory injunction praying the court to restrain the Minister of Local Government from laying a new Legislative Instrument on the new districts before Parliament.
Despite the court action which was instituted on January 27, 2012, LI for the creation of additional districts and municipalities has been laid before Parliament by the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development.
The LI, which will mature 21 days after its presentation, will also provide the platform for the Electoral Commission (EC) to create more constituencies in the run-up to the December general election.
The motion on notice for interlocutory injunction is seeking among other reliefs an order directed at the Atttorney-General to direct the Minister of Local Government and Rural
Development or any other Minister from laying in Parliament any LI
made pursuant to Section 3 of the Local Government Act, 1993 (Act 462)
pending the hearing and final determination of the action.
It is also seeking an order directed at the Speaker of Parliament from
permitting to be laid before Parliament for the consideration of
Parliament by the Minister of Local Government or any other Minister
any legislative instrument made pursuant to Section 3 of the Local
Government Act, 1993 (Act 462) or pursuant to any other section or
provision in any other enactment pending the hearing and final
determination of the action.
The motion is praying the court to restrain the Electoral Commission
from acting in any way whatsoever pursuant to directions made by the
President in furtherance of Section 1 (3) of the Local Government Act,
1993 (Act 462).
An affidavit in support of the motion for interlocutory injunction
stated among others that despite the court action, the Ministry of
Local Government has taken steps to lay the LI before Parliament and
unless stopped by the highest court of the land, the administration of
justice would be undermined.

The Woyome saga - State to file additional evidence

March 1, 2012 (Front Page)

THE Commercial Division of the Fast Track High Court has granted permission to the state to introduce allegations of fraud against a businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome.
The court in effect has given permission to the state to lead evidence to the effect that Woyome made fraudulent claims and in the process succeeded in obtaining a default judgement and subsequently received a payment of GHC51.2 million.
However, the court, presided over by Ms. Justice Barbara F. Ackah-Yensu, awarded GHC2,000 against the state in favour of Woyome because it took the state more than a year to file the amended writ of summons and statement of claim.
According to the Attorney-General’s Department, Woyome obtained the judgement debt through fraudulent means and for that reason, prayed the court to allow it to amend its writ of summons and statement of claim to include the element of fraud against Woyome.
The A-G is currently in court seeking an order for the refund of the judgement debt of GH¢51,283,480.59 paid to Woyome because it was procured by fraudulent means.
Citing numerous legal authorities to buttress the court’s decision, Ms. Justice Ackah-Yensu held that the court took into account the public interest in the administration of justice before granting the request.
She said “there is no reason why I should take a contrary view because because the defendant/respondent was not opposed to the introduction of fraud into the matter” adding that “the issue of fraud can be raised anytime in proceedings.”
On the issue of the Constitutionality raised by the Attorney-General which stated that the alleged contract between Woyome’s company and government did not receive Parliamentary approval thereby rendering it null and void, the court held that it would be delving deep into the matter if it ruled on that.
The court was of the view that for the matter to be complete, effective and finally determined to avoid multiplicity of issues, it was important for it to allow the state to amend its writ of summons and statement of claim.
It accordingly gave the Attorney-General’s Department three days to file its amended writ of summons and statement of claim while it gave Woyome seven days to respond.
The case was adjourned to March 26, 2012 for hearing.
Woyome was absent in court.
Among the reliefs contained in the writ filed at the Registry of the Commercial Division of the High Court, Accra, on Monday, January 16, 2012 is a declaration that the terms of settlement filed on June 4, 2010, to the effect that Mr Woyome should be paid the sum in three equal instalments of GH¢17,094,495.53, were procured by mistake on the part of the A-G and due to fraudulent misrepresentation by Mr Woyome.
Additionally, the A-G is seeking a declaration to set aside the consent judgement of the court on the grounds that Mr Woyome had no contract with the government and consequently lacked a cause of action and the capacity to make the said claim in any court of competent jurisdiction.
According to the A-G, all the agreements between the Government of Ghana and Vamed/Waterville (Waterville as an assignee of Vamed) were null, void and of no legal effect whatsoever, in accordance with Article 181 (5) of the Constitution, to have grounded any cause of action in Mr Woyome or any claimant pursuant to such a contract.
The A-G is seeking a declaration that all the processes filed and proceedings involving Mr Woyome and the A-G were null and void because Mr Woyome lacked the legal capacity to institute the suit, thereby rendering the consent judgement a nullity for the same reasons.
The A-G, in his proposed amended statement of claim, said he had now discovered new and more documents and information from diverse sources involved in the transaction between the government and Waterville that disclosed that the claims by Mr Woyome were fraudulent.
He averred that on May 4, 2005, the then Deputy Minister of Finance signed a letter of introduction which was given to Mr Woyome which stated that the government did not bear responsibility for any liabilities that would arise from the transactions.
Subsequently, following a change in government, Mr Woyome, knowing the contents of the letter and the disclaimer in it, knowingly and fraudulently misrepresented to the A-G that he was entitled to his claim.
The particulars of fraud indicated that Mr Woyome, in making his misrepresentation to the A-G, knew that his claim was untrue and, indeed, intended to deceive the A-G to authorise payment for the sum he claimed when he knew that the government was not liable to pay the sum to him.
Furthermore, the A-G said it was upon those misrepresentations that the government was liable to pay the two per cent for financial engineering that it authorised payments in several instalments to Mr Woyome and that he colluded with Waterville to write to the A-G misrepresenting and supporting the claims when both Mr Woyome and Waterville knew that Mr Woyome did not have any claims against the government.
It said some time in 2005, the government won the bid to host the Africa Cup of Nations football tournament (CAN 2008) and the award of the hosting rights to Ghana required that the country rehabilitated and refurbished its football stadia and other sporting facilities, including the Ohene Djan and the Baba Yara stadia.
The A-G averred that the government initiated a procurement process for the award of the contract to rehabilitate the stadia but cancelled the procurement process before it was completed.
According to the A-G, Waterville made various protests to the government on the purported abrogation of the procurement process and, in consequence of the protests, the government and Waterville entered into negotiations and settled their differences by signing a memorandum of understanding between them, dated November 30, 2005.
In that settlement, the parties agreed that the government would award the Ohene Djan Sports Stadium and El-Wak Stadium, both in Accra, on a turnkey basis to Waterville.
The A-G said in all the transactions, from the invitation to tender, the concurrent approval and purported abrogation, among others, the government dealt directly with Waterville or its accredited agent and later with Vamed and its accredited agents as assignees of the rights of Vamed.
He said the government had never entered into any contract with Mr Woyome in any form whatsoever in respect of the stadia projects or at all, and there was no contract on which Mr Woyome could have maintained any cause of action in the court or any court against the government among others.
In his amended statement of defence and counter-claim, Mr Woyome also averred that the letter of May 4, 2005 referred to by the A-G was an election by the government at the time not to be responsible for any expenses that would be incurred by him in the course of his financial engineering but the same did not refer to the obligation of the government arising out of the successful completion of the financial engineering.
Mr Woyome further denied that the negotiation of the judgement obtained by him on May 24, 2010 was arrived at by mistake on the part of the A-G and that after he had obtained the judgement, he was invited by the A-G to a meeting on May 27, 2010.
As a result of meeting, an agreement was reached that the judgement debt be steeled by the payment of GH¢41,811,480.59 as the judgement debt of five million euros or its cedi equivalent.
The amount represented half of the interest awarded by the court and costs of GH¢25,000.

Pastor's wife charged with stealing

February 29, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)

A pastor’s wife was yesterday put before the Accra Circuit charged with stealing 158 assorted cellular phones, worth GH¢55,100.

Leticia Ayensu Akoto, a trader, was alleged to have stolen the cellular phones belonging to Eric Abrah, her husband, who is a pastor, in August 2011.

She pleaded not guilty to one count of stealing and was granted bail in the sum of GH¢15,000, with two sureties, to reappear on March 8, 2012.

Prosecuting, Assistant Superintendent of Police Mrs Sarah Acquah told the court that the complainant allowed the accused person to take full responsibility of his two cellular phone shops in November 2009 while he concentrated on his pastoral duties.

According to the prosecution, the complainant took full stock of the assorted cellular phones in his shop before handing over the shop to Leticia.

About 2 p.m. on August 2, 2011, the complainant went to his shops and realised that both shops had been closed down.

He later received information that the accused person had packed all the cellular phones in his shop and absconded.

Following that revelation, the complainant rushed home and found that the accused person had packed her belongings, together with his cellular phones, and was about to leave for her home town.

The police managed to retrieve 205 assorted cellular phones from Leticia during initial investigations but she could not account for the remaining 158 phones.

She was later charged and put before court after investigations.

The Woyome saga - CID QUIZZES MOULD-IDDRISU

February 25, 2012 (Lead Story)

A former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, was on Friday, February 24, 2012 subjected to a three-hour interrogation by the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service.
Her lawyer, Nana Ato Dadzie, told journalists after he and his client had emerged from the Conference Room at the CID Headquarters at 8 p.m. that she had been invited by officials of the CID.
Mrs Mould-Iddrisu was driven off in a dark-coloured Mercedes Benz saloon car, with registration number GE 800 – 09, after she and her lawyer had granted a five-minute interview to journalists who had waited outside while she was being questioned.
According to Nana Dadzie, his client had not been charged for any offence.
He said Mrs Mould-Iddrisu had, at all material times, acted professionally in the discharge of her duties as Attorney-General and Minister of Justice.
“We believe and reaffirm our position that Betty acted professionally in the discharge of her duties. We vigorously put our case across during the interrogation and the police acted professionally,” he stated.
He maintained his client’s innocence and indicated that he had, in a letter dated February 6, 2012, indicated his client’s willingness to submit a voluntary statement to the police and explained that the police had responded and said they would invite his client at the appropriate time.
Nana Dadzie said the invitation had been extended to them yesterday and they obliged by reporting for questioning.
Mrs Mould-Iddrisu, who laughed when journalists questioned her lawyer whether or not she had been charged for any offence, thanked the journalists for allowing her to state her side of the story.
She reiterated that she had acted professionally in the discharge of her duties and further stated that she had not committed any crime to warrant any accusations.
Her presence at the CID Headquarters did not attract any crowd.
Woyome and a former Deputy Minister of Education and Sports, Mr O. B. Amoah, had drawn huge crowds to the CID precincts when they were picked up by armed men on February 3 and February 19, 2012, respectively, for interrogation.
Mrs Mould-Iddrisu was questioned on the circumstances under which the state had not contested Woyome when he filed a writ at the Fast Track High Court, resulting in the award of GH¢51.2 million in default judgement and the subsequent payment of the money to him under her watch.
She is the seventh person to be interrogated by the CID over what has been termed the Woyomegate scandal by the media.
Another person interrogated in connection with the payment of the GH¢51.2 million is Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo, who is alleged to have cancelled procurement processes on the construction of new stadia for CAN 2008 during his tenure as Minister of Education.
He was questioned on February 21, 2012 and allowed to go home.
Mr Amoah, who has been charged with two counts of causing financial loss and corruption, is currently on a GH¢20 million bail with two sureties
Woyome, the man at the centre of the saga, has been charged with three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretence and corruption of public officer and is billed to reappear before the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court with the three others on March 5, 2012.
Those standing trial with him are a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh; the Director of Legal Services at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MOFEP), Paul Asimenu, and Mrs Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, Nerquaye-Tetteh’s wife, into whose account Woyome allegedly paid GH¢400,000.
Nerquaye-Tetteh has been charged with two counts of conspiracy and corruption of public officer, while Asimenu and Gifty have been charged with a count each of abetment of crime.

A-G vs Woyome - Court decides on February 29

February 24, 2012
THE Commercial Court will on February 29, 2012 decide whether or not to allow the Attorney-General (A-G) to introduce fresh allegations of fraud against a beleaguered businessman Alfred Agbesi Woyome, who was paid GHC51.2 million in judgement debt.
According to the Attorney-General’s Department, Woyome obtained the judgement debt through fraudulent means and has, therefore, prayed the court to allow it to amend its writ of summons and statement of claim to include the element of fraud against Woyome.
The A-G is currently in court seeking an order for the refund of the judgement debt of GH¢51,283,480.59 paid to Woyome because it was procured by fraudulent means.
At the sitting of the Commercial Division of the High Court in Accra today, a Senior State Attorney, Mr Cecil Adadevoh, said should the grant the prayer, his outfit would lead evidence to prove that Woyome obtained the money through fraudulent means.
He prayed the court to allow his outfit to introduce the fresh evidence to enable Woyome to also respond to them.
Counsel for Woyome, Ms Dora Nortey, who opposed the state’s application said the judgement debt awarded to his client constituted an agreement between Woyome and the government.
She said since there was a contract between the two parties the A-G alone could not go to court to litigate without seeking the consent of Woyome.
Ms Nortey argued that the A-G was seeking to introduce which the court should not allow but in another vain urged the court to allow the A-G to lead evidence on the allegations of fraud to enable his client to respond.
Woyome was absent in court.
Among the reliefs contained in the writ filed at the Registry of the Commercial Division of the High Court, Accra, on Monday, January 16, 2012 is a declaration that the terms of settlement filed on June 4, 2010, to the effect that Mr Woyome should be paid the sum in three equal instalments of GH¢17,094,495.53, were procured by mistake on the part of the A-G and due to fraudulent misrepresentation by Mr Woyome.
Additionally, the A-G is seeking a declaration to set aside the consent judgement of the court on the grounds that Mr Woyome had no contract with the government and consequently lacked a cause of action and the capacity to make the said claim in any court of competent jurisdiction.
According to the A-G, all the agreements between the Government of Ghana and Vamed/Waterville (Waterville as an assignee of Vamed) were null, void and of no legal effect whatsoever, in accordance with Article 181 (5) of the Constitution, to have grounded any cause of action in Mr Woyome or any claimant pursuant to such a contract.
The A-G is seeking a declaration that all the processes filed and proceedings involving Mr Woyome and the A-G were null and void ab initio because Mr Woyome lacked the legal capacity to institute the suit, thereby rendering the consent judgement a nullity for the same reasons.
The A-G, in his proposed amended statement of claim, said he had now discovered new and more documents and information from diverse sources involved in the transaction between the government and Waterville that disclosed that the claims by Mr Woyome were fraudulent.
He averred that on May 4, 2005, the then Deputy Minister of Finance signed a letter of introduction which was given to Mr Woyome which stated that the government did not bear responsibility for any liabilities that would arise from the transactions.
Subsequently, following a change in government, Mr Woyome, knowing the contents of the letter and the disclaimer in it, knowingly and fraudulently misrepresented to the A-G that he was entitled to his claim.
The particulars of fraud indicated that Mr Woyome, in making his misrepresentation to the A-G, knew that his claim was untrue and, indeed, intended to deceive the A-G to authorise payment for the sum he claimed when he knew that the government was not liable to pay the sum to him.
Furthermore, the A-G said it was upon those misrepresentations that the government was liable to pay the two per cent for financial engineering that it authorised payments in several instalments to Mr Woyome and that he colluded with Waterville to write to the A-G misrepresenting and supporting the claims when both Mr Woyome and Waterville knew that Mr Woyome did not have any claims against the government.
It said some time in 2005, the government won the bid to host the Africa Cup of Nations football tournament (CAN 2008) and the award of the hosting rights to Ghana required that the country rehabilitated and refurbished its football stadia and other sporting facilities, including the Ohene Djan and the Baba Yara stadia.
The A-G averred that the government initiated a procurement process for the award of the contract to rehabilitate the stadia but cancelled the procurement process before it was completed.
According to the A-G, Waterville made various protests to the government on the purported abrogation of the procurement process and, in consequence of the protests, the government and Waterville entered into negotiations and settled their differences by signing a memorandum of understanding between them, dated November 30, 2005.
In that settlement, the parties agreed that the government would award the Ohene Djan Sports Stadium and El-Wak Stadium, both in Accra, on a turnkey basis to Waterville.
The A-G said in all the transactions, from the invitation to tender, the concurrent approval and purported abrogation, among others, the government dealt directly with Waterville or its accredited agent and later with Vamed and its accredited agents as assignees of the rights of Vamed.
He said the government had never entered into any contract with Mr Woyome in any form whatsoever in respect of the stadia projects or at all, and there was no contract on which Mr Woyome could have maintained any cause of action in the court or any court against the government.
The A-G said subsequent to the final judgement agreed with Mr Woyome to compromise the said judgement and that subsequent to the filing, the A-G had information that the terms of settlement had been procured by mistake.
That, the A-G said, was based on a letter by the then government, dated May 4, 2005 and signed by a Deputy Minister of Finance, Mr Kwaku Agyeman Manu, which stated that the government did not take responsibility and was not liable for any transaction entered into by Mr Woyome and that his role in the transaction did not create any legal relations with the Government of Ghana.
In his amended statement of defence and counter-claim, Mr Woyome also averred that the letter of May 4, 2005 referred to by the A-G was an election by the government at the time not to be responsible for any expenses that would be incurred by him in the course of his financial engineering but the same did not refer to the obligation of the government arising out of the successful completion of the financial engineering.
Mr Woyome further denied that the negotiation of the judgement obtained by him on May 24, 2010 was arrived at by mistake on the part of the A-G and that after he had obtained the judgement, he was invited by the A-G to a meeting on May 27, 2010.
As a result of meeting, an agreement was reached that the judgement debt be steeled by the payment of GH¢41,811,480.59 as the judgement debt of five million euros or its cedi equivalent.
The amount represented half of the interest awarded by the court and costs of GH¢25,000.

Case of review 230 Constituencies - Supreme Court dismisses application

February 24, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)

THE Supreme Court has, by a unanimous decision, dismissed an application which prayed it to order the Electoral Commission (EC) to review the 230 constituencies in the country.
Two residents of Nungua in Accra, Messrs Richard Odum Bortier and Daniel Quaye, had filed an application praying the court to direct the EC to review the 230 constituencies as they stood now by altering them, following the publication of the enumeration figures of the 2010 Population and Housing Census, in accordance with the egalitarian principle of fair representation solidly embodied in the 1992 Constitution.
Also joined in the suit was the Attorney-General.
According to the court, the Supreme Court was not the proper forum to address that matter.
The court held that the proper forum for the plaintiffs was either the Regional Tribunal or the Court of Appeal.
It, accordingly, advised the plaintiffs, who were represented by Mr Ayikoi Otoo, to seek their reliefs at the courts designated by the Chief Justice.
No costs were awarded.
Later in an interview with journalists, Mr Otoo, a former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, said he had sent the matter to the Supreme Court because he had filed the application in July 2011, four clear months before the Chief Justice constituted the Regional Tribunal.
He said his clients would move to the Regional Tribunal for their reliefs to be looked into.
In the substantive application, the plaintiffs sought, among other things, a declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of Article 47 clauses 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the 1992 Constitution, the boundaries as demarcated by the EC of Ghana shall be made so as to ensure that it was in accordance with the egalitarian principle of fair representation solidly embodied in the Constitution.
They also prayed the court to direct the EC to review the boundaries of all constituencies as they existed now by altering them in order to conform with Article 47 (3) and (4) of the Constitution, with emphasis on the population distribution in accordance with the egalitarian principle of fair representation in the Constitution.

Missing 77 parcels of cocaine - Asem Darkei charged

February 23, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)

CHRISTIAN Sheriff Asem Darkei, alias The Limping Man, who was alleged to have played a major role in the shipment and disappearance of 77 parcels of cocaine weighing 2,310 kilogrammes with a street value of $138.6 million in April 2006 has been charged.
The accused person, who has been in hiding since 2006 until his arrest on February 2, 2012 was arrested by BNI officials at the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital upon a tip off.
He pleaded not guilty to the three counts of conspiracy, importation and exportation of narcotic drugs and was remanded to reappear before the Circuit Court, presided over by Ms Audrey Korcuvie-Tay on March 7, 2012.
Sheriff was indicted for allegedly paying $3,000 to a detective sergeant to facilitate his (Sheriff’s) escape.
The prosecutor, an Assistant Superintendent of Police, Mr A. A. Annor, had prayed the court to remand the accused person to enable the completion of investigations into the matter.
But the trial judge held that it was improper for the prosecution to hide behind the law and deprive Sheriff his liberty.
She, therefore, urged the prosecution to read out the charges on which the accused person was being held as well as take his plea.
Mr Annor obliged and read out the charges to which Sheriff denied any wrongdoing.
Counsel for Sheriff, Mr George Heward-Mills said the prosecution was holding his client over a mirage and stated that the court should grant his client bail if the prosecution delayed the trial.
He also complained that officials of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) made it impossible for him to have conference with his client.
Sheriff, who looked sober while in the dock was whisked away in a waiting vehicle some few minutes after hearing of his case.
According to the facts of the case at about midnight on April 26, 2006, a vessel, the MV Benjamin, reportedly carrying about 77 parcels of cocaine with each parcel weighing 30 kiolgrammes docked at Kpone/Tema and discharged the cocaine. It said the said 77 parcels were offloaded into a waiting vehicle which carried them away.
According to the prosecution, in the course of investigations, Sheriff’s name featured prominently as the importer and/or owner of the drug. He was said to be the person who chartered the vessel at a cost of $150,000 to tow another vessel from Guinea to Ghana.
Sheriff, the prosecution noted, was the person who carted the alleged 77 parcels on the ship’s arrival at Kpone.
The disappearance of the cocaine led to the constitution of the Georgina Wood committee and the subsequent trial of persons alleged to have played various roles.
In July 2008, an Accra Fast Track High Court, presided over by Mr Justice Anin Yeboah (now a Supreme Court judge ), convicted and sentenced Joseph Kojo Dawson, the owner of the MV Benjamin and Managing Director of Dashment Company Limited; Isaac Arhin, sailor; Phillip Bruce Arhin, mechanic; Cui Xian Li, the vessel engineer, and Luo Yui Xing, sailor, all crew members of the MV Benjamin, to 25 years in prison with hard labour. Phlip Bruce-Arhin, however, died barely three weeks after his conviction.
The convicts, including the deceased, were found guilty on charges of using property for narcotic offences, engaging in prohibited business relating to narcotics and possession of narcotic drugs without lawful authority.
A sixth accused person, Pak Bok Sil, a Korean national, was on Tuesday, October 16, 2007 acquitted and discharged by the court, which ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove a case against him.

Following the committee’s recommendations, the trial of Kwabena Amaning alias Tagor and Alhaji Issah on November 28, 2007 and they were sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment each with hard labour for conspiracy and engaging in prohibited business relating to narcotic drugs.
However, they were released on July 25, 2009 when they appealed against the High Court’s decision.
For aiding a fugitive, The Limping Man, to flee with 2,280 kilogrammes of cocaine, three policemen were in December 2007 sentenced to a total of 75 years imprisonment with hard labour by the Accra Fast Track High Court.
Sergeant David Nyarko, Detective Corporal Dwamena Yabson and General Lance Corporal Peter Bondorin, were sentenced to serve 25 years imprisonment each after the court found them guilty of receiving an unspecified amount in US dollars from Dakei and subsequently allowing him to flee.
Bondorin died in prison a few months after his conviction.

Although, the Georgina Wood Committee recommended that Sheriff be prosecuted, he had since 2006 proved elusive until his arrest in February 2012.

CID GRILLS OSAFO-MAAFO - For his role in the Woyome saga

February 22, 2012 (Lead Story)

THE Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service yesterday subjected a former Minister of Finance and Economic Planning (MoFEP), Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo, to a two-hour interrogation on his alleged role in the GH¢51.2 million Woyome judgement debt saga.
He was alleged to have cancelled procurement processes on the construction of new stadia for CAN 2008 during his tenure as Minister of Education and Sports.
Mr Osafo-Maafo, who was allowed to go home after interrogation, also gave a detailed account of what he knew about an alleged contract between the government of Ghana and Waterville.
He is the sixth official to be queried on the circumstances leading to the award and subsequent payment of GH¢51.2 million to the beleaguered businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, who is currently standing trial for defrauding the state.
Other persons invited for questioning in connection with the matter are a former Deputy Minister of Education and Sports, Mr O.B. Amoah, who is currently on a GH¢20 million bail, with two sureties.
A seventh official, a former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, under whose tenure the judgment debt was awarded to Woyome, has also indicated her willingness to assist the CID to unravel the truth.
Those standing trial alongside Woyome at the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court are a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh; the Director of Legal Services at the MoFEP, Paul Asimenu, and Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, Nerquaye-Tetteh’s wife, into whose account Woyome allegedly deposited GH¢400,000.
Counsel for Mr Osafo-Maafo, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, confirmed in an interview with the Daily Graphic that his client had been invited through him on Monday night to report to the CID Headquarters yesterday afternoon.
Mr Dame, who was present throughout the interrogation, said he and his client had reported at the CID before 12 noon but the interrogation began an hour later.
He further explained that Mr Osafo-Maafo tendered in evidence relevant documents to assist the police in their investigations.
He said his client basically justified why he had cancelled the procurement processes, which action, he claimed, saved the government more than $40 million.
Mr Dame argued that corruption did not come in at all because his client acted properly and within the confines of the law to protect the taxpayer’s purse.
“My client has not collected money from anybody; he has not caused any financial loss to the state,” he declared.
“We are willing and prepared to assist the police to expose any wrongdoing by any public officer connected with fraudulent payments to Woyome,” he added.
Counsel further stated that his client should receive commendation, instead of condemnation, for acting in a way to save the state millions of dollars which would have been lost.
Sources close to the CID confirmed that Mr Osafo-Maafo had not been charged. They also maintained that he had been invited to assist in investigations and was released to go home after questioning.
The atmosphere at the CID Headquarters was serene.
The General Secretary of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Mr Kwadwo Owusu-Afriyie, and a former Chief Executive of the Ghana Trade Fair Authority, Ms Esther Ofori, were at the precincts of the CID Headquarters to lend support to Mr Osafo-Maafo.
Mr Owusu-Afriyie maintained the innocence of his party members and urged President J. E. A. Mills to go after the real culprits in the Woyome saga.

O.B. Amoah charged with corruption, causing financial loss

February 21, 2012 (Front page)

A former Deputy Minister of Education and Sports in the Kufuor administration, Mr O.B. Amoah, was yesterday charged with two counts of corruption and willfully causing financial loss to the state.
That was after he had been arrested on Sunday night in connection with the payment of the GH¢51.2 million judgement debt to Alfred Agbesi Woyome, a businessman.
He was released on bail in the sum of GH¢20 million with two sureties.
He is the fifth person to be picked up, aside from Woyome, who allegedly made false claims to receive GH¢51.2 million in judgement debt; Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, a Chief State Attorney, Mr Paul Asimenu, the Director of Legal Services at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, and Mrs Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, Nerquaye-Tetteh’s.
As soon as Mr Amoah was released about 4.15 p.m, a large crowd of New Patriotic Party (NPP) faithful, family members and sympathisers surged forward to carry him shoulder high amid excitement and jubilation.
Earlier in the morning, NPP heavyweights, including the Minority Leader in Parliament, Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu; the General Secretary, Kwadwo Owusu-Afriyie, aka Sir John, several Members of Parliament, family members, friends and sympathisers besieged the premises of the Police Headquarters to give Mr Amoah moral support.
The National Youth Organiser of the NPP, Mr Anthony Karbo, expressed concern over the mode of Mr Amoah’s arrest, saying the police did not obtain explicit permission from the Speaker of Parliament to release Mr Amoah to them, as the law prescribed.
He said the NPP, as a party, was not against individuals being invited to help in investigations but maintained that due process must be followed.
Mr Thaddeus Sory, who was at the CID offices before 9 a.m. to secure bail for Mr Amoah, took a swipe at the police for attempting to humiliate and intimidate his client.
He accused the police, who had picked up his client from his home between 8 p.m. and 9 p.m., of mischief and maintained that “they could have acted more professionally”.
He said his client had denied any wrongdoing and submitted a written statement to the police.
Mr Sory was particularly disappointed at the failure of the police to reply to a letter he had written on February 15, 2012, in which he had indicated his client’s willingness to assist in investigations with regard to the payment of the GH¢51.2 million to Woyome, who is currently standing trial for fraud.
In the said letter, counsel said, he had indicated to the police to state the venue, date and time for his client to report and submit a written statement on what is now known as the Woyome saga.
“Rather than reply our letter, which clearly stated our intention and willingness to co-operate with investigations, they resorted to taking him off guard by effecting his arrest on a Sunday night,” counsel blurted.
“We find it strange that on a Sunday night, without any prior request that he should make himself available to assist in investigations, you go and effect his arrest,” Mr Sory pointed out, and maintained that the police could have done a better and more professional job.
Counsel argued that the action of the police “gives us the impression that there is more to it than a desire to do justice”.
He further stated that the Attorney-General was currently before the courts contending that the state owed Woyome no liability and for that reason whatever his client was alleged to have jointly or severally done did not incur any liability.
Mr Sory said his client had vehemently denied any wrongdoing and was prepared to clear his name.
He also found it most unfortunate the refusal of the police to grant his client bail on Sunday, especially when Mr Amoah had all along declared his intention to fully co-operate with investigations.
Mr Amoah was Deputy Sports Minister in the erstwhile Kufuor administration when contracts awarded for the construction of stadia ahead of the CAN 2008 tournament were cancelled and re-awarded.
Mr Amoah was reported to have instructed the construction firm Waterville Holdings to move to site ahead of a formal contract for the rehabilitation of the Accra, Kumasi and El-Wak Sports stadia for CAN 2008.
A memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Waterville and the Government of Ghana formed the basis for his letter.
An interim report by EOCO said: “Mr O.B. Amoah was the Deputy Minister who gave the green light for Waterville to proceed to site and start work at the time the contract had not been approved by Parliament.”

Woyome released on bail

February 18, 2012 (Front page)

ALFRED Agbesi Woyome, the businessman at the centre of the GH¢51.2 million judgement debt saga, was yesterday released on bail, following his ability to meet reviewed bail conditions set out by the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court.
The bail was reviewed from GH¢54 million with two sureties to be justified to GH¢20 million with three sureties to be justified.
Woyome, according to one of his lawyers, Alhaji Musah Ahmed, got home around 6 p.m. yesterday to rejoin his family after spending 336 hours in lawful custody.
Alhaji Ahmed explained that the justification provided was more than GH¢20 million.
Counsel stated that sureties for Woyome had to go through vigorous processes of having documents tendered to be authenticated at the Lands Commission and other relevant government agencies.
He said a valuation report was produced for all the three sureties before Woyome was allowed to go home.
Woyome has been in custody since February 3, 2012 after he was picked up by armed security men in traffic around 1 p.m. for questioning on the circumstances leading to the award of GH¢51.2 million judgement debt to him.
He was remanded on February 6, 2012 and granted bail in the sum of GH¢54 million with two sureties to be justified on February 13, 2012 but he could not meet the bail terms.
Following that, his lawyers applied for a review of the bail.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, reviewed the bail conditions after two lawyers had assisted one of Woyome’s lawyers, Mr Robertson Kpatsa, to submit the application for variation of the earlier bail.
At the court’s sitting on Thursday, Mr Addo Atuah and Mr Yonny Kulendi, lawyers for Nerquaye-Tetteh and his wife and Asimenu, had put up lucid and compelling arguments which convinced the trial judge to reduce the GH¢54 million with two sureties to be justified bail condition to GH¢20 million with three sureties to be justified.

Woyome's bail terms reviewed

February 17, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)

THE bail terms for Alfred Agbesi Woyome, the businessman who is standing trial for defrauding the state of GH¢51.2 million, have been reviewed, following the intervention of two lawyers.
Woyome, who has been in custody since February 3, 2012, is standing trial alongside Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, a Chief State Attorney; Paul Asimenu, the Director of Legal Services at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, and Mrs Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, the wife of Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh.
Mr Addo Atuah and Mr Yonny Kulendi, lawyers for Nerquaye-Tetteh and his wife and Asimenu, put up lucid and compelling arguments which convinced the trial judge, Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, to reduce the GH¢54 million with two sureties to be justified to GH¢20 million with three sureties to be justified.
Earlier attempts by counsel for Woyome, Mr Robertson Kpatsa, to convince the trial judge to reduce his client’s bail condition appeared to be falling on deaf ears, as the judge kept reminding him (counsel) that he (counsel) had earlier in the week informed the court that the defence team was prepared to satisfy “any” bail condition the court might impose.
Mr Atuah and Mr Kulendi had to step in and argue their hearts out in their bid to convince the trial judge.
The judge picked up the court’s records and quoted what could be termed as the “bragging rights” of Mr Kpatsa.
Mr Atuah told the court that Woyome’s bank accounts, as well as his assets, had been frozen by the Economic and Organised Crimes Office (EOCO).
According to counsel, who caught the court’s rapid attention with that revelation, Woyome would not abscond should the bail conditions be made flexible because all that he had worked for in all his life had been frozen and, for that reason, he would stay on and rightfully claim what he had toiled for.
Mr Atuah informed the court that Woyome had a fixed place of abode, was gainfully employed, as well as pursuing other matters at the Commercial Court to prove his innocence in the matter.
Associating himself with submissions by Mr Atuah and Kpatsa, Mr Kulendi reminded the court that Woyome did not break into the Bank of Ghana (BoG) to take the GH¢51.2 million.
He said Woyome had gone to a court of competent jurisdiction to claim what he believed to be rightfully his, adding that it was unfortunate that the Republic had misconstrued his action in court as fraud.
Mr Kulendi further argued that it was only someone who owned a company as big as Trassacco Valley who could stand surety for Woyome, adding that the grant of bail was meant to render the liberty of an accused person pending and during a trial.
Counsel submitted that Woyome had the most visible face in Ghana now and for that reason it was impossible for him to abscond.
Mr Kpatsa, who had a tough time convincing the judge, had earlier submitted that the bail term was so harsh and that his client had not been able to meet the requirements.
Mr Justice Ajet-Nasam then moved in and questioned him on whether or not he was the same person who had earlier in the week stood before his court and claimed Woyome had substantial sureties who were prepared to stand in.
Although Mr Kpatsa found it difficult to answer the judge’s questions, he made an attempt and prayed the court to review its bail condition.
A Chief State Attorney, Ms Cynthia Lamptey, opposed the defence team’s application for bail and said the bail should be commensurate with the GH¢51.2 million.
She argued that it would be paltry if the court granted Woyome bail in an amount less than GH¢51.2 million.
Ms Lamptey also submitted that Woyome’s bank accounts, and not his assets, that had been frozen, adding that Woyome could deposit his passport and yet find a way to abscond.
In his ruling, Mr Justice Ajet-Nasam said the defence and the prosecution had argued persuasively and maintained that bail should not be used as a punitive measure.
He queried what essence it would serve if the accused person was granted bail and yet could not go out to meet his lawyers to prepare his defence.
He, accordingly, reviewed the bail and directed Woyome to report himself twice a week to the police.
Hearing continues on Monday, February 20, 2012.

Appeal Court to decide on Osei-Adjei's case

February 16, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)

THE Court of Appeal will, on April 19, 2012, decide the fate of a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Akwasi Osei-Adjei, who has appealed against the Fast Track High Court's order directing him to open his defence on charges of conspiracy and contravening the Public Procurement Act (PPA) in the importation of rice from India.
The Court of Appeal will on that day pronounce its decision as to whether or not to uphold Osei-Adjei’s appeal praying the court to reverse the lower court’s ruling or set aside part of the lower court’s ruling that he has a case to answer on two counts of conspiracy and contravening the PPA.
It fixed the date after the prosecution and defence teams had announced that they were relying on their written submissions.
Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, counsel for Osei-Adjei, however, raised a point of law and stated that the prosecution relied mostly on a repealed law to oppose his client’s appeal.
On February 25, 2011, the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court acquitted and discharged Mr Osei-Adjei on six counts of conspiracy, wilfully causing financial loss to the state, use of public office for profit and stealing.
Also acquitted was the former Managing Director of the National Investment Bank (NIB), Mr Charles Daniel Gyimah, who faced similar charges with the former minister.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice Bright Mensah, however, ordered Osei-Adjei and Gyimah to open their defence on charges of conspiracy and contravening the PPA in the importation of rice from India.
A notice of appeal filed on March 18, 2011 is also praying the Court of Appeal to stay proceedings at the Financial Court until the final determination of the appeal.
Osei-Adjei is praying the court to set aside the ruling of the lower court and give consequential orders acquitting and discharging him on the two counts.
The grounds of appeal state, among others, that the trial judge placed weight on irrelevant evidence and disregarded the overwhelming evidence of all the prosecution witnesses that there had been no use of public funds as defined by the PPA.
According to the appellant, the trial judge also disregarded the evidence of the prosecution that the NIB was not a procurement entity which was required to apply the PPA.
Meanwhile, the lower court has stayed proceedings in the substantive case.
In its ruling on a “submission of no case” filed on behalf of the accused persons, the lower court was of the view that the prosecution had failed to lead evidence to prove that Osei-Adjei and Gyimah wilfully caused financial loss to the state by allegedly acting together to steal 2,997 bags of rice valued at US$1,408,590.
It also upheld the defence team’s argument that the prosecution also failed to prove that the accused persons used public office for profit, as well as conspired to steal, but directed the two to open their defence on two counts of conspiracy and contravening the PPA.
Osei-Adjei and Gyimah have pleaded not guilty to the charges levelled against them and have been admitted to bail in the sum of GH¢200,000, with two sureties each to be justified.
The prosecution called 17 witnesses and closed its case on November 30, 2010. The trial began in October 2009.

Woyome granted bail

February 14, 2012 (Front page)

THERE was spontaneous jubilation at the premises of the Fast Track High Court when a beleaguered businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, who is standing trial for defrauding the state to the tune of GHC51.2 million was granted bail.
The crowd, most of whom wore t-shirts with the inscription “Free Woyome – God rules in the affairs of men” had sang war songs amidst loud drumming a week earlier but today cheered and danced immediately news trickled in that Woyome had been granted bail in the sum of GHC54 million with two sureties, one to be justified.
Some women removed their clothes and laid them on the ground for Woyome to walk on when he was led out of the courtroom to a waiting vehicle with registration number UE 970 U.
Taking in and enjoying the royalty treatment, Woyome waved at the crowd who told him to be bold. He also shook hands with those who dared to force their way through the thick security which had surrounded him.
Armed policemen made it virtually impossible for photojournalists to take pictures of Woyome, who waved at the crowd. Woyome, from all indications did not mind being photographed but the armed men sandwiched him and covered his face anytime a photojournalist made an attempt to take pictures.
Inside the courtroom, Woyome, who is perceived to be a financier of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), nodded his head and kept a muted smile when a Chief State Attorney, Ms. Cynthia Lamptey, indicated that the prosecution was not opposed to bail for him and his alleged accomplices.
He is standing trial with a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, the Director of Legal Services at the MOFEP, Paul Asemani and Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, wife of Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh into whose account Woyome deposited GHC400,000.
Woyome is alleged to have put in false claims to defraud the state to the tune of GHC51.2 million with the active connivance and assistance of Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asemani. The three were remanded on February 6, 2012 but were granted bail when they appeared before the court today.
Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asemani were granted bail in the sum of GHC6, 000 each with two sureties each and one each to be justified. The court, presided over by Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, ordered each of the accused persons to report twice a week to the police.
The courtroom was as usual, packed to capacity with some lawyers and reporters up on their feet. Armed men attempted to drive away reporters who were monitoring proceedings from the corridors of the courtroom but changed their stance later.
Woyome and the other accused persons, who were brought in a convoy amidst motorcade were led to the courtroom at exactly 10:10 a.m.
Treated like a high profile personality by security men, Woyome smiled and waved at the cheering crowd.
Unlike the last adjourned date when he looked pensive and moody, Woyome looked calm, collected and kept a hidden smile when the state announced that it was not opposed to bail for him and his alleged accomplices.
Spotted in a light mauve long sleeved African shirt with black embroidery, Woyome smiled and interacted with his lawyers immediately the judge retired to his chambers.
The other accused persons were quietly whisked away into a different vehicle. The crowd did not notice them worse of all cheer them.
Earlier at the court’s sitting, lawyers for the accused persons prayed the court to grant bail to their clients under favourable conditions.
Woyome, has pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretence and corrupting a public officer. Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh has also pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy and corruption of public officere. Nerquaye-Tetteh’s wife also pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of crime.
Hearing continues on Monday, February 20, 2012.
END.

Jomoro youth protest - Over intended relocation of gas processing plant

Friday, February 10, 2012 (Page 28 Lead)

TENSION is looming in the Jomoro District of the Western Region following reports of a possible relocation of an $850 million gas processing plant from Donmunlini to Atuabo in the Ellembele District.
The youth in the area are up in arms against moves by the authorities to relocate the gas plant from Donmunlini to Atuabo and argue that the decision is premature and hasty; but the government shares a different view.
“The Board of Ghana National Gas Company is yet to take a definite position on the siting of the project but Atuabo is likely and best site for now,” said the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Ghana National Gas Company, Dr George Sipa-Adjah Yankey, in an interview with the Daily Graphic.
He said the government would consider national interest over emotional sentiments and cited the security of the plant as one of the reasons the plant needed to be sited at Atuabo.
According to him, preliminary studies conducted by Synopec, a Chinese company, indicated that the country would save millions of dollars if the plant was sited at Atuabo and not the originally designated town of Domunlinu.
The youth of Jomoro, in a strong-worded statement to traditional rulers in the Western Nzema Traditional Council, government officials and other stakeholders, have indicated their intention to move to the Castle in their numbers to protest the decision to relocate the gas processing plant.
According to the youth, farmers in the original designated area had lost large tracts of farmlands but they have not been paid any compensation.
They said it was, therefore, painful for the area to be sidelined at the last hour, especially when they had lost virtually all their farmlands; their main source of livelihood.
Reacting to their concerns, Dr Yankey denied allegations that he was one of the officials championing the relocation of the project and gave the assurance that his outfit had taken steps to compensate affected farmers.
He said the Land Valuation Board had been tasked to do crop numeration and put value on commercial trees which were felled in order to pave way for the payment of compensation to affected farmers.
He also gave the assurance that petrochemical industries would be built on the acquired land to create jobs for people in the area.
Dr Yankey said construction works on the plant which would be fed with gas from the Jubilee Oilfields are expected to be completed this year.
Currently, road survey for the laying of the onshore pipeline has been completed while engineering studies of the structure of the onshore pipeline would be completed in a couple of weeks after which pipes would be ordered.
The chief executive officer further explained that tenders had been received from prospective companies interested in manufacturing the gas processing plant and added that a company would be selected to manufacture the plant before the middle of next month.
A Deputy Minister of Energy, Mr Emmanuel Kofi-Armah Buah, who was also accused of manipulating the relocation of the project, denied any wrongdoing.
“I have no power to divert the project,” he explained and further disclosed that the Jomoro District had not been abandoned because a fertilizer plant would be set up to provide jobs for people in that area.
He said the Volta River Authority (VRA) would provide a $600 million 500 megawatts power plant at Bonyere in the Jomoro District.

POLICE TO QUIZ OSAFO-MAAFO - For his role in the Woyome saga

Wednesday, February 8, 2012 (LEAD STORY)

THE Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service has officially invited a former Minister of Finance and Economic Planning (MOFEP), Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo, to answer questions in connection with the circumstances that led to the payment of GH¢51.2 million in judgement debt to Alfred Agbesi Woyome, a businessman.
This brings to five the number of persons who have been formally invited by the CID to help the police in their investigations into the payment of the money to Woyome.
Woyome is currently on remand with a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, and the Director of Legal Services at the MOFEP, Paul Asimenu. Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, the wife of Nerquaye-Tetteh, into whose account Woyome deposited GH¢400,000, is on bail.
A sixth official, a former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, under whose tenure the judgement debt was awarded to Woyome, has also indicated her willingness to assist the CID to unravel the truth.
The CID’s invitation was extended through Mr Osafo-Maafo’s lawyer, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame, on Monday to inform his client to report at the CID Headquarters at 11 a.m. yesterday.
However, the meeting could not take place because CID officials cancelled it at the last hour because of other engagements.
According to Mr Dame, “We were on our way to the CID office when, in the middle of the trip, I received a call from an official who said the meeting had been cancelled.”
An official at the CID Headquarters confirmed Mr Dame’s testimony and explained that the invitation had been cancelled at the last hour because the CID had other equally important engagements.
“We will invite him in due course,” the official said, but did not state the specific date or time for the invitation.
Mr Dame, in an interview with the Daily Graphic, said his client was waiting to receive a new date from the police.
He stated that the developments debunked claims that Mr Osafo-Maafo was evading the police.
“We are willing and prepared to assist the police to expose any wrongdoing by any public officer connected with fraudulent payments to Woyome,” Mr Dame said.
He said his client was also ready to prove that the decisive action he took in cancelling the procurement process initiated while he was in office resulted in the “state enormously saving public funds” which would have been lost.
Counsel further stated that his client should receive commendation, instead of condemnation, for acting in a way to save the state millions of dollars which would have been lost.
Woyome is standing trial at the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court for allegedly defrauding the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million.
He is alleged to have put in false claims to defraud the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million, with the active connivance and assistance of Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asimenu.
The three were remanded to reappear on February 13, 2012.
Woyome pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretences and corrupting a public officer.
Nerquaye-Tetteh was charged with two counts of conspiracy and corruption of a public officer. He pleaded not guilty to the offence, while his wife faced one count of abetment of crime.
Asimenu, on the other hand, pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of crime.
Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, who is alleged to have allowed Woyome to pay GH¢400,000 into her bank account, is currently on GH¢500,000 bail.

Woyome's case against EOCO adjourned

Wednesday, February 8, 2012 (Front Page)

THE suit instituted against the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) by a businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, over its handling of investigations into the payment of GH¢51.2 million to him has been adjourned.
The Fast Track High Court, presided over by Mr Justice K. A. Ofori-Atta, adjourned the case to February 13, 2012 to enable EOCO to serve its defence in the matter to Woyome’s lawyers.
Although EOCO has completed its investigations and indicted Woyome and some present and past government officials, the court will go ahead and hear the case on its merit.
Woyome, who is currently on remand, is questioning the mandate of EOCO to investigate the matter.
His argument is that EOCO has no mandate to investigate the judgement of a court.
He is consequently seeking an injunction to stop EOCO from continuing with the investigations, which has been completed and an interim report dated February 1, 2012 submitted to President J. E. A. Mills.
Woyome’s lawyers are also challenging EOCO’s action to freeze their client’s bank accounts.
Woyome is currently on remand with a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, and the Director of Legal Services at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, Paul Asimenu. Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, the wife of Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, into whose account Woyome deposited GH¢400,000, is on GH¢500,000 bail.
Woyome is standing trial at the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court for defrauding the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million.
He is alleged to have put in false claims to defraud the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million, with the active connivance and assistance of Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asimenu. The three were remanded to reappear on February 13, 2012.
Woyome pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretence and corrupting a public officer, while Nerquaye-Tetteh is charged with two counts of conspiracy and corruption of a public officer. He pleaded not guilty to the offence, while his wife faced one count of abetment of crime.
Asimenu, on the other hand, had pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of crime.

New charges against Mawuenyegah

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 (Front page)

FRESH charges have been preferred against a Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mrs Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda, for her alleged role in 1,020 grammes of cocaine turning into sodium bicarbonate.
DSP Tehoda, who was granted bail by the Human Rights Division of the Fast Track High Court on January 30, 2012, had her freedom once again curtailed when the Accra Circuit Court remanded her in custody to reappear on February 20, 2012.
She is facing a new charge of abetment of crime, to wit, undertaking an activity relating to narcotic drugs, contrary to Section 56 (c) and 3 (2) of PNDCL 236 Narcotic Drugs (Control, Enforcement and Sanctions) Act 1990.
The particulars of offence said “between July 21, 2011 and December 13, 2011 in the Greater Accra Circuit and within the jurisdiction of this court did abet one Nana Ama Martins to swap a cocaine exhibit weighing 1,020 grammes into sodium bicarbonate”.
DSP Tehoda was initially charged with one count of abetment of crime of stealing of cocaine under Section 20 (1) of Act 29/60 and Section 56 (a) of PNDCL 236.
The Human Rights Court, in granting bail to her, said the charge was misleading because there was no law which charged individuals for “loss of cocaine”.
The prosecution, led by a Chief State Attorney, Mr Anthony Rexford Wiredu, substituted the old charge with a new one, thereby rendering her bail null and void.
DSP Tehoda, who reported to court from her home, looked bewildered when the court refused to grant her bail, although her lawyers had prayed it to grant her bail.
The facts of the case were that following the Vice-President‘s directive on December 4, 2011, the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) launched investigations into the missing cocaine which was tendered in evidence in Circuit Court One on September 27, 2011 and was admitted with objection in evidence for the court in the case involving Nana Ama Martins.
On the following day, September 28, 2011, the defence team objected to the exhibit, claiming it was not cocaine.
According to the prosecution, it would lead fresh evidence to prove that an uncle of Nana Ama Martins’s, called Yankah, and a sister of hers, Serwah Gyaabah, had told a witness in the case that they (Yankah and Serwah) managed to turn the cocaine into soda with the help of DSP Tehoda after the judge and his court clerk had refused to take GH¢4,000 and GH¢1,000, respectively, as bribe.
According to the prosecution, there was another witness to confirm the role played by DSP Tehoda and the others to turn the cocaine into sodium bicarbonate.
It further stated that DSP Tehoda assisted Nana Martins’s family to get a buyer to sell her house in order to raise GH¢10,000 to pay legal fees and other expenses. DSP Tehoda was also said to have invited Nana Martins’s lawyer to her office three times to pay off his legal fees.
The prosecution alleged that DSP Tehoda informed the lawyer that she, with the connivance of others, had managed to swap the cocaine and that at the trial he should request for a re-testing, which was done.
It said evidence would be led to show that DSP Tehoda jubilated in her office after the narcotic drug found on Nana Martins had tested positive for soda.
Mr Wiredu prayed the court to remand DSP Tehoda on the grounds that she was facing a different charge.
Counsel for DSP Tehoda, Mr E. A. Vordoagu, did not take kindly to the turn of events and said the prosecution had introduced fresh facts which did not form part of the charge sheet.
He said a close study of the recounted facts demonstrated that the prosecution was alleging that the so-called cocaine exhibit was swapped in court, adding that it was now public knowledge that the BNI report did not disclose where the swapping took place.
Counsel argued that the charge preferred against his client would fail due to doubts created, adding that “the facts cannot be substantiated in material aspect. The facts are all hearsay”.
He further argued that the charge sheet was an afterthought just to scuttle the bail that had been granted, adding, “The prosecution is desperate and bent on persecuting the DSP.”
He described the prosecution’s action as “malicious” and accordingly prayed the court to grant his client bail.
However, the trial judge, Ms Audrey Korcuvie-Tay, said DSP Tehoda’s offence was narcotic related and for that reason her hands were tied by the law.
She, accordingly, refused her bail and remanded her to reappear February 20, 2012.

COURT REMANDS WOYOME - And 2 others for defrauding the State

Tuesday, February 7, 2012 (Lead story)

THE Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court on Monday, February 6, 2012 defied loud drum beats and war songs and remanded into police custody Alfred Agbesi Woyome and two others for allegedly defrauding the state to the tune of GH¢51.2 million.
The two are a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, and the Director of Legal Services, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MOFEP), Paul Asimenu.
A third accused person, Mr Nerquaye-Tetteh’s wife, Mrs Gifty Nerquaye-Tetteh, into whose account Woyome paid GH¢400,000, was granted bail in the sum of GH¢500,000 with two sureties. She was also ordered to report herself to the police twice a week.
,The trial judge, Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, ignored the loud drumming, singing of war songs and hurling of curses which filtered into his courtroom and refused a bail application from lawyers for the accused persons.
Woyome, who looked pensive and sober, intermittently shook his head while he was in the dock. He also tapped his feet, as if to ward off stress, while he was on his feet with the others for almost two hours.
A large crowd besieged the court premises and chanted war songs, with the belief that that conduct might save Woyome, but on hearing that Woyome had been remanded, the noise ended immediately.
Woyome, who wore a white linen shirt with black and white embroidery, was remanded together with Nerquaye-Tetteh and Asimenu to reappear on February 13, 2012.
Woyome, who has been in the news for the wrong reasons, pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretence and corrupting a public officer.
Nerquaye-Tetteh was charged with two counts of conspiracy and corruption of a public officer. He pleaded not guilty to the offence, while his wife faced one count of abetment of crime.
Asimenu, on the other hand, pleaded not guilty to one count of abetment of crime.
Armed policemen sent the four accused persons to the packed courtroom at 2.02 p.m. to face the charges. Immediately they entered, a thick crowd outside began beating drums and sang on top of their voices. They were virtually screaming as if they intended to abruptly end proceedings with their noise.
However, their noise-making gradually subdued as hearing progressed. A thick crowd also gathered outside the court premises, as passers-by stopped to catch a glimpse of Woyome.
At exactly 3:27 p.m., 17 minutes after court proceedings had ended, armed policemen led the accused persons out of the courtroom. Photojournalists found it difficult to take photographs of the accused persons as policemen virtually made it impossible for them to do so.
The four, who were treated like high-profile dignitaries, were whisked away in waiting vehicles, amidst the sounding of sirens.
Earlier, a Chief State Attorney, Ms Cynthia Lamptey, had prayed the court to remand the accused because investigations were ongoing to unravel what led to the GH¢51.2 million fraud.
Presenting the facts of the case, Ms Lamptey informed the court that in 2009 Woyome made false representation to the then Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Mrs Betty Mould-Iddrisu, stating that he had a contract with the government of Ghana regarding the construction of sports stadia for CAN 2008 but that the contract had unlawfully been abrogated.
According to the prosecution, Woyome subsequently filed a writ at the High Court, claiming he was owed GH¢41 million and interest of GH¢10.2 million, bringing the total to GH¢51.2 million.
The prosecution said moneys paid were GH¢17.9 million in February 2010, GH¢10 million on January 27, 2011, GH¢10 million on April 18, 2011 and GH¢14.1 million on September 12, 2011
It said investigations showed that the government did not owe Woyome any money, while Nerquaye-Tetteh failed to go to court to defend the action Woyome had instituted against the state.
It further pointed out that Woyome transferred GH¢400,000 into Mrs Nerquaye-Tetteh’s account. Investigations also revealed that as a director of Legal Services, Asimenu had written opinions and quoted wrong figures, as well as given information, which created conditions for Woyome to be paid money which was not due him (Woyome).
Applying for bail, Mr Robertson Kpatsa, counsel for Woyome, said the facts presented by the prosecution were not entirely true.
He argued that the money paid to Woyome was the result of a judgement debt he had obtained from a court of competent jurisdiction.
Mr Kpatsa said his client would defend himself to prove his innocence and prayed the court to grant his client bail because he was a Ghanaian businessman and had families in Ghana.
According to counsel, Woyome had substantial and credible sureties who would stand in for him when granted bail.
For his part, counsel for Nerquaye-Tetteh and his wife, Mr Addo Atuah, prayed the court to grant his clients bail with the reason that what the prosecution had said was grossly at variance with what had happened.
Mr Atuah informed the court that Mrs Nerquaye-Tetteh was a nursing mother who had been granted police enquiry bail and, accordingly, prayed the court to grant her bail, since she would co-operate with the police.
He also argued that it was not Nerquaye-Tetteh’s fault that the state lost the case which had led to Woyome being granted judgement debt.
Counsel for Asimenu, Mr Kwame Akuffo, argued that holding an opinion was not ground enough for criminal indictment in reference to the state’s argument that Asimenu had written opinions which served as grounds for Woyome to defraud the state.