Solomon Asamoah and Prof. Christopher Ameyaw-Akumfi
A High Court in Accra has turned down a request by the Deputy Attorney General to convict the former Chief Executive Officer of Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF), Solomon Asamoah and former Board Chairman of the Fund, Prof. Christopher Ameyaw-Akumfi, for failing to file their defence as directed by the court.
The court, presided over by Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay, instead gave the two another chance to file their defence and other processes by September 23, 2026.
Mr. Asamoah and Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi are on trial for allegedly causing $2 million financial loss to the state by investing it in the Sky Train project.
The court on July 2 ordered the accused persons to mount a defence after holding that the prosecution had made a prima facie case against them through its witnesses.
The accused were unable to file the processes within the 21 days given by the court.
The court subsequently extended that expiry date for the filing of the defence and the processes by another 21 days for case management before the two open their defence.
However, Prince Asafo Adjei, who held brief of Victoria Barth for Mr. Asamoah yesterday, told the court that they have not filed any processes, pointing out that they have filed an application invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in respect of the case.
The application is seeking a certiorari to strike out the court’s refusal of Mr. Asamoah’s submission of no case and the variation of his bail conditions by the trial court.
His lawyers have also filed an application for interlocutory application for stay of proceedings pending the determination of the certiorari application.
Mr. Adjei prayed the court to adjourn the matter to await the decision of the Supreme Court “so that nothing done here prejudices what the Supreme Court may decide.”
Godfred Gyimah Okyere, who held brief of Yaw Acheampong Boafo for Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi, also informed the court that they have filed a repeat application for stay of proceeding pending an appeal against the court’s decision.
Deputy Attorney General, Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, opposed the request for an adjournment, noting that the accused persons’ refusal to file their defence on all instances meant they do not wish to defend themselves any further.
This, he said, is an emphatic challenge to the court to give judgment in the trial.
He noted that an application invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court does not operate as a stay of proceedings, “neither does an application for injunction operate as stay of proceedings.”
He also pointed out that a repeat application for stay of proceedings does not operate as a stay of proceedings.
“The accused are asking for my lady’s discretion. The law is that a party who has refused to comply with the court’s order is not entitled to the court’s discretion,” he stated.
Dr. Srem-Sai added that the accused persons have shown “emphatically that they do not have a defence – they showed it twice.”
He, therefore, prayed the court to convict the two as a consequence of their refusal to open their defence.
Justice Kocuvie-Tay said the filing of processes at the higher court does not fetter the jurisdiction of the trial court to proceed with the matter.
She, however, extended time to the accused persons to file their witness statements if they are so minded.
She gave them up to September 23 to file the processes while adjourning the case to October 5 for case management.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak
Read Full Story
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Instagram
Google+
YouTube
LinkedIn
RSS