Former GIIF CEO Rejects Claims Sky Train Project Was Rushed Through Board

The former Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF), Solomon Asamoah, has denied allegations that the Accra Sky Train Project was hastily introduced and approved by the GIIF Board without adequate deliberation.

Testifying through his counsel, Victoria Barth, before the Criminal Division of the High Court, presided over by Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay, Mr. Asamoah maintained that the Sky Train project featured prominently in the Fund’s board discussions and was “mentioned not less than eight times” in official minutes.

The denial came during cross-examination of Yaw Odame-Darkwa, the first prosecution witness and a former GIIF board member, on Wednesday.

Mr. Asamoah, the first accused person in the ongoing criminal trial, contended that the project was first presented to the board on September 5, 2018, and subsequently discussed at several other meetings.

According to him, “it cannot be correct for the witness to state that the Sky Train concept was only introduced at one of our board meetings,” adding that official records show multiple deliberations on the subject.

During the proceedings, the defence meticulously walked Mr. Odame-Darkwa through a series of questions to establish standard board procedures — including how meeting notices, agendas, and board documents were circulated via email by the board secretary or legal head.

The witness confirmed that meetings were properly convened, minutes were duly adopted, and all correspondence related to board and sub-committee meetings were routinely shared through official email channels.

The defence then tendered into evidence several minutes of GIIF board meetings — all signed by the board chairman and secretaries — from September 2018 through December 2020, which contained references to the Sky Train project.

These included meetings held on: September 5, 2018, October 24, 2018, June 25, 2019, November 19, 2019, January 8, 2020, April 28, 2020, September 25, 2020 and December 22, 2020

Mr. Odame-Darkwa admitted that he was shown these same board minutes during investigations by the National Intelligence Bureau (NIB), and confirmed his signatures on statements he provided to investigators in March 2025 regarding the $2 million payment made in connection with the Sky Train transaction.

The defence argued that these minutes prove the project underwent repeated discussions and that Mr. Asamoah acted within the board’s approval framework.

However, under questioning from the prosecution, the witness maintained that while the minutes mention the Sky Train project, they do not necessarily reflect what transpired during the meetings, insisting that certain procedural steps were not properly followed before the disbursement of funds.

Prosecutors alleged that the Sky Train investment did not meet GIIF’s due diligence and approval standards.

The witness emphasized that no formal presentations were made to the Investment Committee and that the project did not pass the “Know Your Customer” and risk assessment stages required for such foreign transactions. The court subsequently adjourned proceedings to November 19, 2025, at 10 a.m. for continuation.

The following is the cross examination of the prosecution witness

Q. How many years did you spend on Wenchi Rural Bank Board?
A. From 2010 to 2020.
Q. How many years did you serve on the Farmers Trust Company?
A. It is my own private company am I still serving on the board, but I don’t recollect the exact date of registration.

Q. How many years did you spend on the board of Apex Bank?
A. 7 years.
Q. So you are very familiar with how board meetings are scheduled, are you not?
A. Yes.

Q. The board of GIIF met at least once every quarter, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Sometimes the board had emergency meetings between the quarterly meetings, is that not so?
A. Yes.

Q. Before every board meeting notices were circulated with the agenda, the date and the venue and time of the upcoming meeting, is that correct?
A. Yes
Q. During your term on the board, notices of meetings were usually circulated by email, is that correct?

A. Yes, my Lady.
Q. And the notices were circulated by either acting board secretary, Kofi Boakye or the head of legal and company secretary, Ms. Harriet Aban, is that correct?
A. Yes my Lady.
Q. The document that would be considered in respect of the agenda for the board meetings were also circulated by email, is that correct?

A. Yes.
Q. And these board pacts or documents were circulated via email by the first accused, is that correct?
A. Not always.

Q. who else would send the board pacts?
A. When Kofi Boakye was acting secretary, he would sometimes send the board pacts and when Harriet Aban also took over she also sometimes sent them.
Q. In the same way notices of board sub-committee meetings were also circulated by email?

A. Yes.
Q. I’m the case of the notices of the board sub-committee meetings they were sometimes circulated by the secretaries to those committees. Is that correct?
A. Yes my Lady.

Q. Your copies of the notices of board and board sub-committee meetings were sent to either one of these two email addresses: [email protected] or [email protected], is that correct?

A. Yes my Lady
Q. It is also correct that from time to time, you acknowledged receipt of the notices of board and board sub-committee meetings that were sent to you by email. Is that correct?
A. Yes my Lady
Q. In the same manner minutes or board meetings about board sub- committee meetings were circulated to board members by email. Is that correct?

A. Yes my Lady
Q. This minutes were usually adopted at subsequent board meetings or board sub-committee meetings respectively, after necessary corrections were done. Is that correct?
A. Yes my Lady.

Q. It is after the adoption of such minute that the secretary (Kofi Boakye or Harriet Aban) will then sign the adopted minute with the board chairman, the second accused herein. Is that not so?
A. Yes my Lady.
Q. On 11th March, 2025, you were invited to the National Intelligence Bureau, is that correct?

A. Yes.
Q. Prior to this invitation nobody had contacted you about any unlawful activity of the GIIF board during your term in the board. Is that correct?
A. Yes my Lady.
Q. On 11th March, 2025 you gave a written statement to the NIB regarding the payment of $2 million in respect of the Sky Train transaction, is that correct?

A. Yes my Lady.
Q. Please confirm that the document you have in your hand is that statement in your handwriting.
A. Yes

Q. The statement bears your signature in the bottom right corner of the last word you write, is that correct?
A. Yes my Lady.

Counsel. My Lady respectfully we wish to tender this statement through the witness.

Court: Tendered without any objection.

Q. You gave a second statement to the NIB on 12 March, 2025. Is that correct?
A. Yes my Lady.
Q. Take a look at this document and confirm that it is your second written statement to the NIB win your handwriting and with your signature.
A. Yes my Lady.

Counsel: I wish to tender the document as an investigation caution statement given by the witness on 12 March, 2025.

Court: Exhibit admitted without objection.

Q. Again on 23rd May, 2025 you gave another statement to the NIB. Did you not?
A. That is so.
Q. Do you see your handwriting on the document from name, residential address, postal address and occupation?
A. Yes.
Q. But the rest of the documents is in a different hand writing, is it not so?
A. Yes.

Q. So, did you make that statement or not?
A. I don’t see my signature on it so I cannot speak to it.
Q. So, despite your handwriting appearing on the document, are you saying that you do not wish for this court to rely on that document as a statement you gave?
A. My lady I don’t have that power.

Q. The document in your handwriting has been presented as part of documents that the prosecution obtained from the lead investigator of the Sky Train transaction and which document the prosecution intends to rely on as evidence in this suit. This documents is ascribed to you and I simply need you to confirm whether you made it or not. If you do not remember you may say so.

A. I do not remember.
Q. Have a look at exhibit 1 and read it to the court.
A. I am Yaw Odame-Darkwa. I was a board member from 2017 to 2020. I have been asked about my knowledge about the Sky Train Project. I only found about the payment of the 2 million in the Auditor General ‘s report. The payment should have been sent for board approval. The minute referred to is not a true reflection of what happened in the Sky train matter. At all time I acted in the best interest of Ghana and would never grant approval without due diligence.

Q. You will agree with me from your own reading of exhibit 1 that there were some grammatical errors.
A. Yes.
Q. You must have been nervous when you were making this statement.
A. Yes.

Q. You referred in line 11 to 14 in exhibit 1 “the minute referred to at the instant of the meeting is not a true reflection of what in the Sky train matter at all times.” Which minutes were you referring to?

A. I remember I wrote this statement after we had gone through some level of interrogation at the NIB then in the course of the interrogation counsel for first accused brought out one of our minutes arguing that it shows that we had given fist accuser approval in the Sky train project and also to disburse $2 million towards the project.

That is what I was speaking to that the minute that he was trying to refer to as approval and payment for the project was not a true reflection of what happened at that particular meeting he was referring to.

Q. It is not correct that counsel for the first accused was present on 11th March, 2025 when you were interrogated at NIB when you made the statement in exhibit 1.
A. When I said counsel for first accused, I don’t mean the current counsel. What happened was that he showed us some board minute to refresh our memory of things that happened in the matter and one of the minutes sought to create the impression that the board actually approved the transaction and disbursement of funds.

My Lady, I said so because we had a process and from all indications this transaction did not meet the level at which the board will give approval for the disbursement of funds.

First of all, when the project comes to GIIF, it goes to management and management will decide whether or not to refer such project to the investment committee. When the project comes to the investment committee the first thing is the invite the people behind the project to make a presentation of how they want to do the project.

Seriously, this is the only project I can say I don’t know any of directors. They did not make any presentation to the investment committee. So my Lady if I say the CEO did not have approval it means the basic steps to even get the board to approve have not been followed.
Secondly, my Lady, basic know your customer care was not done.

Thirdly, the board would not have allowed for the money to be transferred outside the jurisdiction if we had been informed before disbursement and I can give you one transaction, which is the cardinal resources, Nambini. The CEO sought the approval of the board to invest in that project to invest in… he wanted us to invest in the Australian stock market.

We agreed to do the project, but we changed the structure of investing outside because we know that as soon as money went outside the country, it was difficult to trace such money. So the board had a clear directive when it came to disbursing money out of the jurisdiction. Even though they approved the project and disbursement, we made sure the money stayed here.
That is why I’m very sure that we did not approve investment in the Sky train project out of Ghana and that we would have enhanced the know your customer requirement…

Q. You have just informed this court that “they showed us some board minutes”. When you said “they” you meant the investigating officers and not the first accused former counsel.
A. It is very possible.

Q. The minutes that were shown to you were minutes of the board of GIIF during your tenure as a board member, which referred to the Sky train project. Is that not so?
A. If you have it, let me see.
Q. Very well, I will show you some board minutes of the meetings of the GIIF board, which the prosecution intends to rely on and which refer to the Sky train project.

First is dated 5th September 2018. Minutes of an emergency meeting of the GIIF signed by the board chairman and Kofi Boakye. Please confirm if this was one of the minutes shown you at NIB.
A. Yes.

I wish to tender the minute through the witness who is listed as attendee on the minute.

Q. Minutes of GIIF board meeting held on 24 October 2018, signed by the board chairman and Kofi Boakye, then acting secretary. Please confirm if this minute was shown to you at NIB.

A. Yes.
Q. Next I will show you the minutes of the board of GIIF dated 25 June, 2019, signed by the chairman and Harriet Aba, company secretary. Please confirm if this was also shown to you at the NIB.

A. Yes.
Q. I’m now showing you minutes of the GIIF board meeting held 19 November 2019 and signed by the board chairman and company secretary, Harriet Aban. Please confirm if this was shown to you at the NIB.

A. Yes
Q. Minutes of the GIIF board held 8th January, 2020 and signed by the board chairman and Harriet Aban.
A. Yes.

Q: Take a look at the GIIF board meetings on April 28, 2020 signed by Chairman and Secretary. Confirm if these minutes were shown to you?
A: Yes
Q: Take a look at GIIF board minutes of 25th September, 2020 signed by board Chairman and company secretary and confirm if they were shown to you at the NIB?

A: Yes
Q: Take a look at GIIF board meeting minutes on 22nd December, 2020, signed by board chairman and secretary and please confirm whether it was shown to you?
A: Yes
Q. You will agree with me that I have shown you at least eight board minutes, which refer to the Sky Train project, would you not?

A. Yes.
Q. So it cannot be correct when you say in paragraph 11 of your witness statement filed on 23rd June, 2025 that the Sky train concept was only introduced at one of our board meetings.
A. No. My Lady, the minutes that you showed me also have other projects also being repeated.

Counsel: This is a witness who said the minutes do not reflect what transpired in the Sky train project. He was shown these minutes at the NIB. Let’s not forget the fact that the life of a man hangs in the balance. If he needs time to refresh his memory, we can adjourn.

Case adjourned to November 19 at 10am.

 

For more news, join The Chronicle Newspaper channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VbBSs55E50UqNPvSOm2z

The post Former GIIF CEO Rejects Claims Sky Train Project Was Rushed Through Board appeared first on The Ghanaian Chronicle.

Read Full Story