Monday, April 30, 2012
April 4, 2012 (Front Page)
Businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, has appealed against the Commercial Court's decision to allow the state to introduce evidence of fraud in the payment of GH¢51.2 million as judgement debt to him.
According to his lawyers, the trial judge erred in law in granting the state permission to introduce evidence of fraud almost two years after the state had filed a suit to retrieve moneys paid him.
The state had, on July 20, 2010, filed an application claiming that an agreement it reached with Woyome regarding the payment of GH¢51.2 million was a mistake, but, according to Woyome, the state "went to sleep until January 16, 2012 when it filed a motion on notice for leave to amend by substitution the amended writ of summons and the accompanying amended statement of claim”.
The Commercial Division of the Fast Track High Court on February 29, 2012 granted permission to the state to introduce allegations of fraud against Woyome and awarded costs of GH¢2,000 against the state in favour of Woyome for delaying.
According to Woyome, the state could raise the issue of fraud but argued that it could not raise any other issue or relief which would reopen matters concluded in the consent judgement resulting in the payment of the GH¢51.2 million to him.
He said it was, therefore, wrong in law for the court to allow the state to reopen issues which had already been tackled in the consent judgement.
In his supporting affidavit, Woyome argued that “in an action charging fraud, it would be a clear impropriety for the state to re-open its case”.
Meanwhile, Woyome, who was absent in court Tuesday, has filed for stay of proceedings at the Commercial Court pending the outcome of the appeal, which will be heard on April 18, 2012.
According to Woyome, in the event that his appeal succeeded, the evidence that would otherwise be led on the reliefs being sought by the state would prejudice the fair hearing of the matter at the Court of Appeal, thereby resulting in a substantial miscarriage of justice.
Woyome, who is currently standing trial at the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court for fraud, is, accordingly, praying the Court of Appeal to stay proceedings at the Commercial Court pending the outcome of his appeal.
At the Commercial Court"s sitting in Accra Tuesday, one of the lawyers for Woyome, Mr Robertson Kpatsa, informed the court of his client's appeal and prayed the court to adjourn the civil case between the state and his client indefinitely to enable his client to pursue the appeal.
He also explained that his client had not filed his amended statement of defence because of the appeal.
The court, however, declined to indefinitely adjourn the case and fixed April 24, 2012 as the next date for hearing.
The Attorney-General (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.
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 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 Woyome or any claimant pursuant to such a contract.
The A-G is seeking a declaration that all the processes filed and proceedings involving Woyome and the A-G were null and void because 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 Woyome were fraudulent, among others.
In his amended statement of defence and counter-claim, 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.
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 the 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.
Woyome opposes introduction of evidence of fraud
April 4, 2012 (Front Page)
A BUSINESSMAN, Alfred Agbesi Woyome has appealed against the Commercial Court’s decision to allow the state to introduce evidence of fraud in the payment of GHC51.2 million to him.
According to his lawyers, the trial judge erred in law in granting the state the permission to introduce evidence of fraud almost two years after the state had filed a suit to retrieve moneys paid him.
The state on July 20, 2010 filed an application claiming an agreement it reached with Woyome regarding the payment of GHC51.2 million was a mistake but according to Woyome the state “went to sleep until January 16, 2012, when it filed a motion on notice for leave to amend by substitution the amended writ of summons and the accompanying amended statement of claim.”
The Commercial Division of the Fast Track High Court on February 29, 2012 presided over by Ms Justice Barbara Ackah-Yensu, granted permission to the state to introduce allegations of fraud against a businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome and awarded cost of GHC2, 000 against the state Woyome for delaying.
Dissatisfied with the Commercial Court’s decision, Woyome filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal on March 13, 2012 challenging the decision of the Commercial Court to grant the state its request.
According to Woyome the state could raise the issue of fraud but argued that the state could not raise any other issue or relief of which will re-open matters concluded in the consent judgement resulting in the payment of the GHC51.2 million to him.
He said it was, therefore, wrong in law for the court to allow the state to re-open issues which had already being tackled in the consent judgement.
In his supporting affidavit, Woyome argued that “in an action charging fraud, it would be a clear impropriety for the plaintiff (state) to re-open its case.”
Meanwhile, Woyome, who was absent in court today has filed for stay of proceedings at the Commercial Court pending the outcome of the appeal.
The appeal would be heard on April 18, 2012.
According to Woyome, in the event that his appeal succeeded, the evidence that would otherwise be led on the reliefs being sought by the state will prejudice the fair hearing of the matter at the Court of Appeal thereby resulting in a substantial miscarriage of justice.
Woyome, who is currently standing trial at the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court for fraud is accordingly praying the Court of Appeal to stay proceedings at the Commercial Court pending the outcome of his appeal.
At the Commercial Court’s sitting in Accra today, one of the lawyers for Woyome, Mr Robertson Kpatsa, informed the court of Woyome’s appeal and prayed the court to adjourn the civil case between the state and his client sine die to enable his client to pursue the appeal.
He also explained that his client had not filed his amended statement of defence because of the appeal.
The court, however, declined to adjourn the case sine die and fixed April 24, 2012 as the next date for hearing.
The Attorney-General (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.
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 among others.
In his amended statement of defence and counter-claim, 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.
Mother And Son Convicted - For Selling fake Cables
April 3, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
A forty-two-year-old businesswoman and her son have been convicted for distributing fake electrical cables to unsuspecting members of the public.
The Managress of Penaabs Electricals Shop at McCarthy Hill in Accra, Evelyn Mingle, and her son, Daniel Owusu, were convicted on three counts of conspiracy, forgery of trademarks and defrauding by false pretence.
They had pleaded not guilty to the charges but the James Town District Magistrate Court, presided over by Mrs Afi Kudomor, found them guilty and convicted them accordingly.
Evelyn was sentenced to two months’ imprisonment with hard labour while Owusu was fined GH¢600 or in default serve 12 months in jail.
The convicts forged the logo of Nexans Kabelmetal and sold fake cables to unsuspecting members of the public. One of their victims, Kofi Tawiah Maafo, lost GH¢3,500 after the convicts had supplied him with fake cables.
In her judgement, the trial judge reprimanded the convicts for engaging in activities which deprived local electrical industries income from their genuine businesses.
The court held that the prosecution had led evidence to prove the guilt of the convicts beyond reasonable doubt.
It said it took into account the manner in which the convicts perpetrated the crime before arriving at its decision and expressed the hope that the sentence would serve as a deterrent.
The trial judge commended the police investigator who went undercover to investigate the nefarious activities of the convicts.
The facts of the case were that one of the complainants in the case, Mr Maafo, went to the convicts’ shop and requested to purchase Nexans PVC cables to wire his house.
According to the prosecution, Evelyn gave him two invoices clearly indicating which cables were cheaper. One of the invoices quoted GH¢3,827 as the price for genuine Nexans Kabelmetal and GH¢2,333 for ones that she referred to as British wires.
Mr Maafo expressed interest in the Nexans cables and reached an agreement with Evelyn to pay a final price of GH¢3,500.
It said after Maafo had paid the said amount, the convicts gave him receipt and supplied him with the cables and said they were the genuine ones, but when the complainant got home, his electrician detected that a large chunk of the cables were fake.
Maafo went back to the convicts’ shop and demanded for genuine Nexans cables but the convicts refused to collect or replace the fake ones.
Their action compelled the complainant to report the incident to the management of Nexans Kabelmetal Limited, who replaced the fake cables and later reported the incident to the police for investigation.
According to the prosecution, a witness bought 75 pieces of Nexans cables from the convicts’ shop and paid for them.
Out of the 75 cables, only two had genuine Nexans cables tags.
A search conducted in Evelyn’s storeroom revealed 100 boxes of fake cables.
Some of the tags were taken to the Quality Control Department of Nexans Kabelmetal but they all turned out as fake.
The convicts were arraigned after investigations.
Jesus Onetouch freed
March 31, 2012 (Lead story)
Nana Kofi Yirenkyi, aka Jesus Onetouch, who was jailed for 10 years for defiling his 10-year-old daughter, regained his freedom Friday after spending 24 months, 21 days in lawful custody.
This was after the High Court, presided over by Mr Justice E. F. Dzakpasu, acquitted and discharged him of the crime.
Jesus Onetouch, who is the General Overseer of Jesus Blood Prophetic Ministry, has been in custody since March 9, 2010, after being convicted on two counts of defilement and incest on January 20, 2011.
He, however, appealed against the Circuit Court’s decision.
The High Court held that the trial judge erred in relying solely on the evidence of the victim, when two prosecution witnesses had contradicted themselves and also when a police officer had testified that the victim had confided in him (police officer) that Prophet Onetouch was not responsible for any crime.
It further held that while a medical doctor from Akropong, had stated that hymens were mostly torn through sex and even indicated that it was mostly lost through sex by a 99.9 per cent margin, an experienced gynaecologist and obstetrics from the Ghana Police Hospital denied that assertion and also testified that hymens could be lost through accidents, games and even through inactions of mothers as well as birth defects.
According to the presiding judge, who cited numerous legal authorities to buttress his decision, doubts when created during criminal trials must inure to the benefit of accused persons.
He further argued that it was extremely dangerous for the lower court to rely on the sole evidence of the alleged victim and her two relatives who had testified on hearsay.
In the judgement, which lasted almost an hour, the court held that the evidence adduced at the lower court was not enough to warrant the conviction of the convict because the prosecution witnesses contradicted themselves.
In addition, it said, the investigator failed to investigate the alibi put up by Jesus Onetouch.
According to the court, it was improper for the investigator to fail to interrogate that piece of evidence as well as the alleged truancy on the part of the victim.
It further contended that the fact that the convict pleaded for the matter to be settled out of court did not mean he was admitting guilt.
The court argued that Jesus Onetouch could have done that due to possible stigmatisation, especially when the complainant was said to have accused her former husband of similar offence.
With regard to Jesus Onetouch’s lawyers argument that the victim could not have endured sex for three times a week for two years without falling sick, the court said that should be left for forencic science to determine.
The court said it took into consideration the totality of evidence adduced by the prosecution as well as the defence put up by Jesus Onetouch and had come to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of convict beyond reasonable doubt, adding that all accused persons were entitled to their fundamental human rights.
Counsel for Onetouch, Mr. K.N. Adomako-Acheampong, together with family members and friends could not hide their excitement when the presiding judge freed him on all two counts.
Immediately after the court’s decision, word quickly spread that Jesus Onetouch had been freed and that resulted in pockets of passersby entering the court premises with the hope of catching a glimpse of him.
They were, however, disappointed when it became evident that Prophet Onetouch, who was serving his sentence at the Nsawam Medium Security Prison, was not in court.
His junior pastors and friends were spotted making calls to announce the decision of the High Court.
He will be free to go home and join his family after the necessary documents had been studied and signed by prison authorities.
Mr Adomako-Acheampong, who smiled intermittently at the tail end of the court’s judgement praised the judge for his erudite ruling.
Counsel told journalists that, although, it took too long, justice had finally prevailed.
He said it was unfortunate his client was vilified by the media and public opinion but in the end justice prevailed.
It was a dark day for Prophet Onetouch when the trial judge, Mrs Georgina Mensah-Datsa, sentenced him to 10 years' imprisonment for incest and defilement.
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Osafo-Maafo, O. B. Amoah fail to restrain EOCO
March 29, 2012 (Front Page)
THE Accra Fast Track High Court on March 28, 2012 dismissed an application which prayed it to bar the Economic and Organised Crimes Office (EOCO) from inviting a former Minister of State, Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo, to assist in investigations into the payment of GHC51.2 million to a businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome.
It also declined to stop the EOCO from investigating the role played by a former Deputy Minister of Education and Sports, Mr. O. B. Amoah in the award of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008.
In effect, the EOCO can proceed with investigations into circumstances leading to the eventual payment of the controversial payment of GHC51.2 million to Woyome, who is currently standing trial for fraud.
Giving its ruling in applications for interlocutory injunction separately filed by the two personalities, the court, presided over by Mr. Justice Dennis Adjei, held that he would not allow himself to be swayed by his colleague judge, Mr Justice K. A. Ofori-Atta, who had earlier stopped the EOCO from investigating the former Chairman of the Local Organising Committee of the Local Organising Committee of CAN 2008, Mr Kofi Amoah.
In two separate but similar rulings, the court held that Mr. Osafo-Maafo and Mr. Amoah failed to convince the court on the likelihood of bias on the part of the EOCO.
According to the court, the court would be exercising its discretion in excess of its of its jurisdiction if it granted the plaintiffs request because they had not given any cause to prove that the EOCO was prejudiced.
It said it had carefully studied the applications for interlocutory injunction and had not seen any improper use of discretion on the part of the EOCO.
The court, however, directed the EOCO to inform the two former government functionaries in writing as to whether or not they were the proper individuals to be investigated as well as whether or not they were the proper persons to assist in investigations.
It also directed the EOCO to ensure that the applicants appeared before it in the company of their lawyers.
The court further directed the EOCO to ensure that the date and time the applicants were expected to report and testify were clearly spelt out to the applicants.
It also advised the EOCO to adhere to the rights of the applicants as enshrined in the 1992 Constitution and ensure that the applicants were treated fairly and without prejudice.
Mr Osafo-Maafo was present in court in the company of his wife, Anna but Mr. Amoah, who is also the Member of Parliament for Aburi/Nsawam was absent in court.
Mr. Osafo-Maafo filed an application for interlocutory injunction for an order to restrain the EOCO and its agents from continuing with investigations into the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008 pending the final determination of the suit.
According to the applicant, who said he received a letter dated January 5, 2012 and inviting him to assist in EOCO’s investigations, his suit had a great chance of success and unless EOCO was restrained by the court, he would suffer irreparable loss.
An affidavit in support of his application stated that EOCO’s continuous conduct of investigations into the matter was likely to prejudice a fair hearing and determination of the suit and in the process, occasion a miscarriage of justice.
The court, however, held a different view and declined to grant the reliefs sought by Mr Osafo-Maafo.
Mr. Osafo-Maafo has so far appeared before the Criminal Investigations Division (CID) of the Ghana Police Service and stated the circumstances under which he cancelled procurement processes in the award of contract for the construction of stadia for the CAN 2008.
According to him the cancellation saved the country millions of dollars.
In his substantive application, Mr Osafo-Maafo, who was also a former Minister of Finance and Economic Planning, said public utterances by the President, the Deputy Attorney-General and the EOCO clearly indicated bias and the likelihood that investigations would be prejudiced against him.
He is, therefore, praying the court to declare that the purported investigations being undertaken by the EOCO into what he termed suspected serious offences including fraud in the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008, and an invitation to him to assist in investigations were unlawful to the extent that they were issues raised in a report of the Auditor-General duly laid before Parliament.
The plaintiff is further praying the court to declare that the circumstances involving the payment of the colossal sum of GH58,095,974.13 to Mr Woyome and the acts and utterances of the President, the Deputy Attorney-General and the EOCO disables the EOCO from acting in a fair and reasonable manner.
He is, therefore, seeking an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from proceeding with the investigations into the so-called suspected serious offences including fraud in the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008 as well as other reliefs the court might deem fit.
A date is yet to be fixed for the hearing of the substantive matter.
On his part, Mr. Amoah had prayed the court to stop the EOCO from conducting investigations into suspected fraud in the award of contract for CAN 2008 stadia as well as the award and payment of judgement debt to Woyome.
He also prayed the court to restrain the EOCO from compelling him to assist in investigations.
The substantive reliefs he sought from the court were a declaration that EOCO had no statutory mandate in civil and commercial matters.
He also sought a declaration that the moves by the EOCO to investigate the matter was calculated to undermine and prejudice the outcome of the matter between the Attorney-General and Woyome at the Commercial Court in Accra.
Mr. Amoah has been granted GHC20 million police enquiry bail in connection with what is now known as Woyome saga.
He has denied corruption and causing financial loss to the state charges and explained that GHC75,000 allegedly paid to him by Woyome was in connection with purchase of land for mineral water project at his constituency.
THE Accra Fast Track High Court on March 28, 2012 dismissed an application which prayed it to bar the Economic and Organised Crimes Office (EOCO) from inviting a former Minister of State, Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo, to assist in investigations into the payment of GHC51.2 million to a businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome.
It also declined to stop the EOCO from investigating the role played by a former Deputy Minister of Education and Sports, Mr. O. B. Amoah in the award of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008.
In effect, the EOCO can proceed with investigations into circumstances leading to the eventual payment of the controversial payment of GHC51.2 million to Woyome, who is currently standing trial for fraud.
Giving its ruling in applications for interlocutory injunction separately filed by the two personalities, the court, presided over by Mr. Justice Dennis Adjei, held that he would not allow himself to be swayed by his colleague judge, Mr Justice K. A. Ofori-Atta, who had earlier stopped the EOCO from investigating the former Chairman of the Local Organising Committee of the Local Organising Committee of CAN 2008, Mr Kofi Amoah.
In two separate but similar rulings, the court held that Mr. Osafo-Maafo and Mr. Amoah failed to convince the court on the likelihood of bias on the part of the EOCO.
According to the court, the court would be exercising its discretion in excess of its of its jurisdiction if it granted the plaintiffs request because they had not given any cause to prove that the EOCO was prejudiced.
It said it had carefully studied the applications for interlocutory injunction and had not seen any improper use of discretion on the part of the EOCO.
The court, however, directed the EOCO to inform the two former government functionaries in writing as to whether or not they were the proper individuals to be investigated as well as whether or not they were the proper persons to assist in investigations.
It also directed the EOCO to ensure that the applicants appeared before it in the company of their lawyers.
The court further directed the EOCO to ensure that the date and time the applicants were expected to report and testify were clearly spelt out to the applicants.
It also advised the EOCO to adhere to the rights of the applicants as enshrined in the 1992 Constitution and ensure that the applicants were treated fairly and without prejudice.
Mr Osafo-Maafo was present in court in the company of his wife, Anna but Mr. Amoah, who is also the Member of Parliament for Aburi/Nsawam was absent in court.
Mr. Osafo-Maafo filed an application for interlocutory injunction for an order to restrain the EOCO and its agents from continuing with investigations into the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008 pending the final determination of the suit.
According to the applicant, who said he received a letter dated January 5, 2012 and inviting him to assist in EOCO’s investigations, his suit had a great chance of success and unless EOCO was restrained by the court, he would suffer irreparable loss.
An affidavit in support of his application stated that EOCO’s continuous conduct of investigations into the matter was likely to prejudice a fair hearing and determination of the suit and in the process, occasion a miscarriage of justice.
The court, however, held a different view and declined to grant the reliefs sought by Mr Osafo-Maafo.
Mr. Osafo-Maafo has so far appeared before the Criminal Investigations Division (CID) of the Ghana Police Service and stated the circumstances under which he cancelled procurement processes in the award of contract for the construction of stadia for the CAN 2008.
According to him the cancellation saved the country millions of dollars.
In his substantive application, Mr Osafo-Maafo, who was also a former Minister of Finance and Economic Planning, said public utterances by the President, the Deputy Attorney-General and the EOCO clearly indicated bias and the likelihood that investigations would be prejudiced against him.
He is, therefore, praying the court to declare that the purported investigations being undertaken by the EOCO into what he termed suspected serious offences including fraud in the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008, and an invitation to him to assist in investigations were unlawful to the extent that they were issues raised in a report of the Auditor-General duly laid before Parliament.
The plaintiff is further praying the court to declare that the circumstances involving the payment of the colossal sum of GH58,095,974.13 to Mr Woyome and the acts and utterances of the President, the Deputy Attorney-General and the EOCO disables the EOCO from acting in a fair and reasonable manner.
He is, therefore, seeking an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from proceeding with the investigations into the so-called suspected serious offences including fraud in the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008 as well as other reliefs the court might deem fit.
A date is yet to be fixed for the hearing of the substantive matter.
On his part, Mr. Amoah had prayed the court to stop the EOCO from conducting investigations into suspected fraud in the award of contract for CAN 2008 stadia as well as the award and payment of judgement debt to Woyome.
He also prayed the court to restrain the EOCO from compelling him to assist in investigations.
The substantive reliefs he sought from the court were a declaration that EOCO had no statutory mandate in civil and commercial matters.
He also sought a declaration that the moves by the EOCO to investigate the matter was calculated to undermine and prejudice the outcome of the matter between the Attorney-General and Woyome at the Commercial Court in Accra.
Mr. Amoah has been granted GHC20 million police enquiry bail in connection with what is now known as Woyome saga.
He has denied corruption and causing financial loss to the state charges and explained that GHC75,000 allegedly paid to him by Woyome was in connection with purchase of land for mineral water project at his constituency.
Remove ex-refinery levy - Court of Appeal
March 28, 2012 (Front Page)
THE Court of Appeal has ordered the National Petroleum Authority (NPA) to with immediate effect, remove ex-refinery levy imposed on petroleum products.
It further directed the NPA to account for all moneys accrued on the levy and pay the amount into the Consolidated Fund.
Dismissing the NPA’s application for stay of execution of a High Court order which had directed it in November 2011 to remove levies imposed on petroleum products, the court in a unanimous decision held that the NPA failed to convince it to stay the lower court’s order.
The court, presided over by Mrs Justice Henrietta Abban with Mr Justice F. Kusi-Appiah and Mr Justice E. K. Ayebi as panel members also held that the NPA’s application for stay was devoid of merit.
It also awarded cost of GHC500 against the NPA in favour of Development Data, a Non-governmental organization (NGO) which had contested the legality of the levy at the High Court.
A date is yet to be fixed for hearing of the substantive appeal which is praying the court to dismiss in its entirety, the lower court’s decision which directed the NPA to remove ex-refinery levies imposed on petroleum products.
The High Court, in November 2011 ruled as illegal the ex-refinery levy which has been part of the petroleum price build-up.
It accordingly ordered the NPA to scrap the levy and also ordered the NPA to refund all amounts accrued from the collection of the illegal levy to be paid into the consolidated fund.
Dissatisfied with the lower court’s decision, the NPA filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal and filed an application for stay of execution of the lower court’s order pending the outcome of the substantive appeal.
However, the Court of Appeal after carefully perusing documents filed by parties in the matter, It upheld the decision by the High Court in November 2011 that illegal price margins disguised as “ex-refinery differential” should be knocked off from the fuel prices.
A cost of GH¢500 was awarded the plaintiffs.
The Court of Appeal could not state the specific amount accrued by the NPA as well as the time the money began accruing because it was not furnished with such figures.
The High Court had in January 2012 refused an application to stay execution of its earlier order.
It had on November 28, 2011 ordered the NPA to remove the illegal margins from the prices of petrol, kerosene, diesel and other petroleum products.
It also directed the NPA to publish the total amount collected from the illegal imposition and pay it into the Consolidated Fund.
THE Court of Appeal has ordered the National Petroleum Authority (NPA) to with immediate effect, remove ex-refinery levy imposed on petroleum products.
It further directed the NPA to account for all moneys accrued on the levy and pay the amount into the Consolidated Fund.
Dismissing the NPA’s application for stay of execution of a High Court order which had directed it in November 2011 to remove levies imposed on petroleum products, the court in a unanimous decision held that the NPA failed to convince it to stay the lower court’s order.
The court, presided over by Mrs Justice Henrietta Abban with Mr Justice F. Kusi-Appiah and Mr Justice E. K. Ayebi as panel members also held that the NPA’s application for stay was devoid of merit.
It also awarded cost of GHC500 against the NPA in favour of Development Data, a Non-governmental organization (NGO) which had contested the legality of the levy at the High Court.
A date is yet to be fixed for hearing of the substantive appeal which is praying the court to dismiss in its entirety, the lower court’s decision which directed the NPA to remove ex-refinery levies imposed on petroleum products.
The High Court, in November 2011 ruled as illegal the ex-refinery levy which has been part of the petroleum price build-up.
It accordingly ordered the NPA to scrap the levy and also ordered the NPA to refund all amounts accrued from the collection of the illegal levy to be paid into the consolidated fund.
Dissatisfied with the lower court’s decision, the NPA filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal and filed an application for stay of execution of the lower court’s order pending the outcome of the substantive appeal.
However, the Court of Appeal after carefully perusing documents filed by parties in the matter, It upheld the decision by the High Court in November 2011 that illegal price margins disguised as “ex-refinery differential” should be knocked off from the fuel prices.
A cost of GH¢500 was awarded the plaintiffs.
The Court of Appeal could not state the specific amount accrued by the NPA as well as the time the money began accruing because it was not furnished with such figures.
The High Court had in January 2012 refused an application to stay execution of its earlier order.
It had on November 28, 2011 ordered the NPA to remove the illegal margins from the prices of petrol, kerosene, diesel and other petroleum products.
It also directed the NPA to publish the total amount collected from the illegal imposition and pay it into the Consolidated Fund.
Woman before court - For setting lover's house ablaze
A WOMAN, who set ablaze, her former lover’s four bedroom house ablaze was on March 27, 2012 arraigned before the Accra Circuit Court.
Abena Agyeman, self-employed set ablaze the complainant’s house at Teshie Okpoi Gonnor, a suburb of Accra and succeeded in razing down the house and personal effects worth GHC220,000 on March 21, 2012 around 10 a.m.
She allegedly took advantage of the absence of the complainant and other occupants of the house and before embarking on her mission.
According to the prosecution, it took personnel of the Ghana National Fire Service (GNFS) two hours to bring the fire under control.
Abena pleaded not guilty to two counts of unlawful entry and causing unlawful damage and was granted bail in the sum of GHC20,000 with two sureties.
She is expected to reappear before the court on April 19, 2012.
Presenting the facts of the case, Inspector A. Afetsi , told the court that the complainant was a staff of an NGO while the accused person was a self-employed woman resident at Tema.
The two met in the United Kingdom in 1998 and fell in love. They subsequently returned to Ghana and continued the relationship.
The relationship turned sour in December 2011 resulting in the eventual break-up of the two.
According to the prosecution, the accused person on March 21, 2012 sneaked into the four bedroom house of the complainant at a time inmates of the house had left for work and set the house ablaze.
She then attempted to escape but a witness in the case spotted her and raised an alarm. She was subsequently arrested and handed over to the Police.
A search in the accused person’s hand bag revealed a plastic bottle containing some quantity of kerosene, two match boxes and a plier believed to have been used by the accused perosn to forcibly open the complainant’s door.
Abena Agyeman, self-employed set ablaze the complainant’s house at Teshie Okpoi Gonnor, a suburb of Accra and succeeded in razing down the house and personal effects worth GHC220,000 on March 21, 2012 around 10 a.m.
She allegedly took advantage of the absence of the complainant and other occupants of the house and before embarking on her mission.
According to the prosecution, it took personnel of the Ghana National Fire Service (GNFS) two hours to bring the fire under control.
Abena pleaded not guilty to two counts of unlawful entry and causing unlawful damage and was granted bail in the sum of GHC20,000 with two sureties.
She is expected to reappear before the court on April 19, 2012.
Presenting the facts of the case, Inspector A. Afetsi , told the court that the complainant was a staff of an NGO while the accused person was a self-employed woman resident at Tema.
The two met in the United Kingdom in 1998 and fell in love. They subsequently returned to Ghana and continued the relationship.
The relationship turned sour in December 2011 resulting in the eventual break-up of the two.
According to the prosecution, the accused person on March 21, 2012 sneaked into the four bedroom house of the complainant at a time inmates of the house had left for work and set the house ablaze.
She then attempted to escape but a witness in the case spotted her and raised an alarm. She was subsequently arrested and handed over to the Police.
A search in the accused person’s hand bag revealed a plastic bottle containing some quantity of kerosene, two match boxes and a plier believed to have been used by the accused perosn to forcibly open the complainant’s door.
Prosecution's handling of Woyome case - JUDGE FURIOUS
March 27, 2012 (Lead Story)
THE Financial Division of the Accra Fast Track High Court on March 26, 2012 subjected state prosecutors to criticism over their handling of criminal proceedings in the controversial payment of GHC51.2 million to a businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, did not take kindly to the state's claim that investigations had not been completed and gave the prosecutors up to April 30, 2012 to start criminal proceedings or face the consequences.
He said it was not fair for the Attorney-General's Office to use the phrase "still investigating" to curtail the liberties of persons.
Barely 20 minutes after this ultimatum, the Commercial Court, for its part awarded GHC500 cost against the state in favour of Woyome for delaying in its civil proceedings to recover the GHC51.2 million.
The Commercial Court directed the prosecution to start leading evidence on April 3, 2012 in the civil proceedings it instituted against Woyome.
This brings the total sum of costs awarded against the state in the civil matter between the state and Woyome to GHC2,500. Costs of GHC2,000 was awarded against the state in the civil matter on February 29, 2012 for its delay in filing additional issues to introduce issues of fraud in the civil matter.
At the Financial Division's sitting in Accra yesterday, Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam said he was particularly disappointed with the prosecution after a Chief State Attorney, Ms Cynthia Lamptey, had prayed the court to adjourn the criminal case against Woyome and three others because investigations had not been completed.
“It is frustrating for the Attorney-General’s office to continue asking for time. It is not good for the image of the country,” the trial judge stated.
He continued “it is high time the state woke up to do what is has been mandated to do with respect to prosecuting such serious cases,” adding “I will give adjournment for the last time for the Attorney-General’s office to advise itself on whether or not to speed up with prosecution or to throw in the towel.”
Visibly disappointed with Ms Lamptey’s prayer for an adjournment, Mr Justice Ajet-Nasam dismissed the state’s earlier claim that the accused persons had not been charged.
He said the records showed Woyome and three others were charged on February 6, 2012. He also reminded the state that they pleaded not guilty to charges preferred against them and for that reason, it was out of place for the state to claim the accused persons had not been charged.
Woyome, who was alleged to have put in false claims to retrieve the said GHC51.2 million has pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretences and corrupting a public officer.
The three others, a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh is facing two counts of conspiracy and corruption of public officer, the Director of Legal Services of the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, Mr Paul Asimenu, is facing one count of abetment of crime while Gifty, wife of Nerquaye-Tetteh is faced with one count of abetment of crime.
The three have all pleaded not guilty to the charges. Woyome and the three others were present in court.
Despite its disappointment with the prosecution, the court declined to discharge the accused persons as requested by the defence team.
At the court’s sitting in Accra today, Ms Lamptey stated that investigations were ongoing and that the prosecution the prosecution will evaluate the facts to decide whether or not the case was worth prosecuting.
She then stated that the accused persons had not been formally charged.
One of the lawyers for Woyome, Mr Sarfo Buabeng, denied Ms Lamptey’s assertion that the accused persons had not been charged and stated that
THE Financial Division of the Accra Fast Track High Court on March 26, 2012 subjected state prosecutors to criticism over their handling of criminal proceedings in the controversial payment of GHC51.2 million to a businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam, did not take kindly to the state's claim that investigations had not been completed and gave the prosecutors up to April 30, 2012 to start criminal proceedings or face the consequences.
He said it was not fair for the Attorney-General's Office to use the phrase "still investigating" to curtail the liberties of persons.
Barely 20 minutes after this ultimatum, the Commercial Court, for its part awarded GHC500 cost against the state in favour of Woyome for delaying in its civil proceedings to recover the GHC51.2 million.
The Commercial Court directed the prosecution to start leading evidence on April 3, 2012 in the civil proceedings it instituted against Woyome.
This brings the total sum of costs awarded against the state in the civil matter between the state and Woyome to GHC2,500. Costs of GHC2,000 was awarded against the state in the civil matter on February 29, 2012 for its delay in filing additional issues to introduce issues of fraud in the civil matter.
At the Financial Division's sitting in Accra yesterday, Mr Justice John Ajet-Nasam said he was particularly disappointed with the prosecution after a Chief State Attorney, Ms Cynthia Lamptey, had prayed the court to adjourn the criminal case against Woyome and three others because investigations had not been completed.
“It is frustrating for the Attorney-General’s office to continue asking for time. It is not good for the image of the country,” the trial judge stated.
He continued “it is high time the state woke up to do what is has been mandated to do with respect to prosecuting such serious cases,” adding “I will give adjournment for the last time for the Attorney-General’s office to advise itself on whether or not to speed up with prosecution or to throw in the towel.”
Visibly disappointed with Ms Lamptey’s prayer for an adjournment, Mr Justice Ajet-Nasam dismissed the state’s earlier claim that the accused persons had not been charged.
He said the records showed Woyome and three others were charged on February 6, 2012. He also reminded the state that they pleaded not guilty to charges preferred against them and for that reason, it was out of place for the state to claim the accused persons had not been charged.
Woyome, who was alleged to have put in false claims to retrieve the said GHC51.2 million has pleaded not guilty to three counts of conspiracy, defrauding by false pretences and corrupting a public officer.
The three others, a Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh is facing two counts of conspiracy and corruption of public officer, the Director of Legal Services of the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, Mr Paul Asimenu, is facing one count of abetment of crime while Gifty, wife of Nerquaye-Tetteh is faced with one count of abetment of crime.
The three have all pleaded not guilty to the charges. Woyome and the three others were present in court.
Despite its disappointment with the prosecution, the court declined to discharge the accused persons as requested by the defence team.
At the court’s sitting in Accra today, Ms Lamptey stated that investigations were ongoing and that the prosecution the prosecution will evaluate the facts to decide whether or not the case was worth prosecuting.
She then stated that the accused persons had not been formally charged.
One of the lawyers for Woyome, Mr Sarfo Buabeng, denied Ms Lamptey’s assertion that the accused persons had not been charged and stated that
Missing 77 parcels of cocaine - Investigations not completed
March 22, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
POLICE have not completed investigations into the case involving Christian Sheriff Asem Darkei, alias The Limping Man, the 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.
An Assistant State Attorney, Mr Owusu Ameyaw, told the Accra Circuit Court at its sitting in Accra today that investigations were ongoing and for that reason, the court should remand the accused person.
However, Sheriff’s lawyer, Mr George Heward-Mills did not take kindly to the prosecution’s claims and argued that investigations should have been completed by now.
Mr Heward-Mills subsequently prayed the court not to entertain the prosecution’s prayer for the remand of his client.
He, therefore, renewed his prayer for bail for his client but the court, presided over by Ms. Audrey Korcuvie-Tay refused to grant counsel’s plea to reappear on April 4, 2012.
Sheriff, 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 has pleaded not guilty to the three counts of conspiracy, importation and exportation of narcotic drugs.
Sheriff was indicted for allegedly paying $3,000 to a detective sergeant to facilitate his (Sheriff’s) escape.
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.
END.
POLICE have not completed investigations into the case involving Christian Sheriff Asem Darkei, alias The Limping Man, the 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.
An Assistant State Attorney, Mr Owusu Ameyaw, told the Accra Circuit Court at its sitting in Accra today that investigations were ongoing and for that reason, the court should remand the accused person.
However, Sheriff’s lawyer, Mr George Heward-Mills did not take kindly to the prosecution’s claims and argued that investigations should have been completed by now.
Mr Heward-Mills subsequently prayed the court not to entertain the prosecution’s prayer for the remand of his client.
He, therefore, renewed his prayer for bail for his client but the court, presided over by Ms. Audrey Korcuvie-Tay refused to grant counsel’s plea to reappear on April 4, 2012.
Sheriff, 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 has pleaded not guilty to the three counts of conspiracy, importation and exportation of narcotic drugs.
Sheriff was indicted for allegedly paying $3,000 to a detective sergeant to facilitate his (Sheriff’s) escape.
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.
END.
Woyome saga - EOCO suspends investigations
March 21, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
THE Economic and Organised Crimes Office (EOCO) has suspended investigations into circumstances leading to the payment of of GHC51.2 million to a businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, until the final determination of a suit brought against it by a former Minister of Education and Sports, Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo.
Lawyer for the EOCO, Dr. Philip Anderson said told the Accra Fast Track High Court today that his client had suspended investigations until the court rules on whether or not to restrain the EOCO from continuing with investigations into what is now known as Woyomegate scandal.
Mr Osafo-Maafo dragged the EOCO to the Fast Track High Court challenging EOCO’s decision to invite him to testify in investigations into payment of GHC51.2 million to Woyome.
According to Mr Osafo-Maafo, who was once a Minister of Finance and Economic Planning, public utterances by the President, the Deputy Attorney-General and the EOCO clearly indicated bias and the likelihood that investigations would be prejudiced against him.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice Dennis Dominic Adjei fixed March 28, 2012 to rule on Mr Osafo-Maafo’s application for interlocutory injunction to restrain the EOCO from investigating him.
The court fixed the date after parties in the case had indicated that they intended to rely on their written submissions.
In the application for interlocutory injunction, Mr Osafo-Maafo is praying the court for an order to restrain the EOCO and its agents from continuing with investigations into the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008 pending the final determination of the suit.
According to the applicant, who said he received a letter dated January 5, 2012 and inviting him to assist in EOCO’s investigations, his suit had a great chance of success and unless EOCO was restrained by the court, he would suffer irreparable loss.
An affidavit in support of his motion filed on his behalf by his lawyer, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame stated that EOCO’s continuous conduct of investigations into the matter was likely to prejudice a fair hearing and determination of the suit and in the process, occasion a miscarriage of justice.
An affidavit in support of the substantive suit and deposed to by counsel for Mr. Osafo-Maafo stated among others that the President’s directive to the EOCO was a ruse in furtherance of the President’s agenda to divert attention and calculated at vindicating his prior public pronouncements of wrongdoing and impropriety by key members of the erstwhile New Patriotic Party (NPP) administration.
It said the various public statements of the President as well as other government functionaries on the payment of money to Mr Woyome undoubtedly demonstrated the bias and the prejudice of the government and the Office of the Attorney-General, the authority with oversight responsibility for the EOCO.
According to the affidavit in support “the ample exhibition of bias and prejudice against key personalities in the erstwhile Kufuor administration including the plaintiff, the defendant cannot be trusted to carry out any fair or impartial investigations into the relevant issues in controversy.”
It further pointed out that the President’s directive mandating the EOCO to carry out investigations in question was in utter bad faith and in gross contravention of the injunction imposed on all persons in positions of authority by the combined effect of Articles 23 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution to act fairly, reasonably and in accordance with due process and in a manner devoid of prejudice, arbitrariness and capriciousness.
“Indeed, the conduct of the President and Attorney-General so far, flouts the fundamental principle of natural justice underpinning our legal system for a person not to be a judge in his own cause and for that matter ought to be curtailed by this honourable court,” the affidavit in support stated.
It added that the Constitution mandated only Parliament to investigate matters arising out of reports of the Auditor-General and to this extent, the defendant’s actions are a direct affront to the authority and powers of Parliament under Article 187 of the Constitution and accordingly prayed the court to grant the plaintiff’s reliefs.
In the substantive matter, Mr Osafo-Maafo is accordingly praying the court to declare that the purported investigations being undertaken by the EOCO into what he termed “suspected serious offences including fraud in the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008”, and an invitation to him to assist in investigations were unlawful to the extent that they were issues raised in a report of the Auditor-General duly laid before Parliament.
The plaintiff is further praying the court to declare that the circumstances involving the payment of the colossal sum of GHC51.2 to Woyome and the acts and utterances of the President, the Deputy Attorney-General and the EOCO disables the EOCO from acting in a fair and reasonable manner.
Mr Osafo-Maafo, who is also a former Minister of Education, is pleading with the court to declare that the purported investigations being undertaken by the EOCO were actuated by bias and prejudice and therefore, unlawful under the 1992 Constitution.
He seeking an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from proceeding with the investigations into the so-called suspected serious offences including fraud in the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008 as well as other reliefs the court might deem fit.
END.
THE Economic and Organised Crimes Office (EOCO) has suspended investigations into circumstances leading to the payment of of GHC51.2 million to a businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome, until the final determination of a suit brought against it by a former Minister of Education and Sports, Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo.
Lawyer for the EOCO, Dr. Philip Anderson said told the Accra Fast Track High Court today that his client had suspended investigations until the court rules on whether or not to restrain the EOCO from continuing with investigations into what is now known as Woyomegate scandal.
Mr Osafo-Maafo dragged the EOCO to the Fast Track High Court challenging EOCO’s decision to invite him to testify in investigations into payment of GHC51.2 million to Woyome.
According to Mr Osafo-Maafo, who was once a Minister of Finance and Economic Planning, public utterances by the President, the Deputy Attorney-General and the EOCO clearly indicated bias and the likelihood that investigations would be prejudiced against him.
The court, presided over by Mr Justice Dennis Dominic Adjei fixed March 28, 2012 to rule on Mr Osafo-Maafo’s application for interlocutory injunction to restrain the EOCO from investigating him.
The court fixed the date after parties in the case had indicated that they intended to rely on their written submissions.
In the application for interlocutory injunction, Mr Osafo-Maafo is praying the court for an order to restrain the EOCO and its agents from continuing with investigations into the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008 pending the final determination of the suit.
According to the applicant, who said he received a letter dated January 5, 2012 and inviting him to assist in EOCO’s investigations, his suit had a great chance of success and unless EOCO was restrained by the court, he would suffer irreparable loss.
An affidavit in support of his motion filed on his behalf by his lawyer, Mr Godfred Yeboah Dame stated that EOCO’s continuous conduct of investigations into the matter was likely to prejudice a fair hearing and determination of the suit and in the process, occasion a miscarriage of justice.
An affidavit in support of the substantive suit and deposed to by counsel for Mr. Osafo-Maafo stated among others that the President’s directive to the EOCO was a ruse in furtherance of the President’s agenda to divert attention and calculated at vindicating his prior public pronouncements of wrongdoing and impropriety by key members of the erstwhile New Patriotic Party (NPP) administration.
It said the various public statements of the President as well as other government functionaries on the payment of money to Mr Woyome undoubtedly demonstrated the bias and the prejudice of the government and the Office of the Attorney-General, the authority with oversight responsibility for the EOCO.
According to the affidavit in support “the ample exhibition of bias and prejudice against key personalities in the erstwhile Kufuor administration including the plaintiff, the defendant cannot be trusted to carry out any fair or impartial investigations into the relevant issues in controversy.”
It further pointed out that the President’s directive mandating the EOCO to carry out investigations in question was in utter bad faith and in gross contravention of the injunction imposed on all persons in positions of authority by the combined effect of Articles 23 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution to act fairly, reasonably and in accordance with due process and in a manner devoid of prejudice, arbitrariness and capriciousness.
“Indeed, the conduct of the President and Attorney-General so far, flouts the fundamental principle of natural justice underpinning our legal system for a person not to be a judge in his own cause and for that matter ought to be curtailed by this honourable court,” the affidavit in support stated.
It added that the Constitution mandated only Parliament to investigate matters arising out of reports of the Auditor-General and to this extent, the defendant’s actions are a direct affront to the authority and powers of Parliament under Article 187 of the Constitution and accordingly prayed the court to grant the plaintiff’s reliefs.
In the substantive matter, Mr Osafo-Maafo is accordingly praying the court to declare that the purported investigations being undertaken by the EOCO into what he termed “suspected serious offences including fraud in the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008”, and an invitation to him to assist in investigations were unlawful to the extent that they were issues raised in a report of the Auditor-General duly laid before Parliament.
The plaintiff is further praying the court to declare that the circumstances involving the payment of the colossal sum of GHC51.2 to Woyome and the acts and utterances of the President, the Deputy Attorney-General and the EOCO disables the EOCO from acting in a fair and reasonable manner.
Mr Osafo-Maafo, who is also a former Minister of Education, is pleading with the court to declare that the purported investigations being undertaken by the EOCO were actuated by bias and prejudice and therefore, unlawful under the 1992 Constitution.
He seeking an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from proceeding with the investigations into the so-called suspected serious offences including fraud in the award and execution of contract for the construction of stadia for CAN 2008 as well as other reliefs the court might deem fit.
END.
DSP Mawuenyegah fails to report to BNI
March 20, 2012 (Page 3 Lead)
A Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda, allegedly involved in the swapping of 1,020 grammes of cocaine into sodium bicarbonate is alleged to have failed to report to the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) for charges to be preferred against her.
A State Attorney, Mr Owusu Ameyaw, made the accusations at the Circuit Court’s sitting in Accra today but Mrs Tehoda denied the allegations.
Mrs Tehoda, whose lawyer was absent when the case was called informed the court that she has been reporting to the BNI as per the bail conditions.
According to her, she reported to the BNI once but met the absence of the investigator.
The trial judge, Ms. Audrey Korcuvie-Tay , however stated that the bail conditions were not before the court for the court to know the terms she was expected to meet.
Mrs Tehoda was for the third time, granted bail by the Fast Track High Court after the Circuit Court had declined to grant her bail.
She had earlier been granted bail on two different occasions by the Human Rights Court but the prosecution managed to secure her remand at the lower court.
Her lawyers did not relent in their efforts and finally secured her bail at the Fast Track High Court on February 14, 2012.
The court granted her bail in the sum of GHc100,000 bail with two sureties, one to be justified and directed her to report to the Police on Mondays.
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.”
The facts of the case were that following Vice President‘s directive on December 4, 2011 the BNI launched investigation 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 of 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 evidence to prove that an uncle of Nana Ama Martins called Yankah and a sister of Nana Ama, Serwah Gyaabah told a witness in the case that they (uncle and Serwaah) 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.
The prosecution further stated that DSP Tehoda assisted Nana Ama Martins’ 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 Ama’s lawyer to her office three times to pay off his legal fees.
The prosecution alleged that DSP Tehoda informed the lawyer she and 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 Ama had tested positive for soda.
A Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Gifty Mawuenyegah Tehoda, allegedly involved in the swapping of 1,020 grammes of cocaine into sodium bicarbonate is alleged to have failed to report to the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) for charges to be preferred against her.
A State Attorney, Mr Owusu Ameyaw, made the accusations at the Circuit Court’s sitting in Accra today but Mrs Tehoda denied the allegations.
Mrs Tehoda, whose lawyer was absent when the case was called informed the court that she has been reporting to the BNI as per the bail conditions.
According to her, she reported to the BNI once but met the absence of the investigator.
The trial judge, Ms. Audrey Korcuvie-Tay , however stated that the bail conditions were not before the court for the court to know the terms she was expected to meet.
Mrs Tehoda was for the third time, granted bail by the Fast Track High Court after the Circuit Court had declined to grant her bail.
She had earlier been granted bail on two different occasions by the Human Rights Court but the prosecution managed to secure her remand at the lower court.
Her lawyers did not relent in their efforts and finally secured her bail at the Fast Track High Court on February 14, 2012.
The court granted her bail in the sum of GHc100,000 bail with two sureties, one to be justified and directed her to report to the Police on Mondays.
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.”
The facts of the case were that following Vice President‘s directive on December 4, 2011 the BNI launched investigation 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 of 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 evidence to prove that an uncle of Nana Ama Martins called Yankah and a sister of Nana Ama, Serwah Gyaabah told a witness in the case that they (uncle and Serwaah) 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.
The prosecution further stated that DSP Tehoda assisted Nana Ama Martins’ 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 Ama’s lawyer to her office three times to pay off his legal fees.
The prosecution alleged that DSP Tehoda informed the lawyer she and 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 Ama had tested positive for soda.
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
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
Friday, March 30, 2012
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)