“The Lord does not delight in the pleasure of the wicked and even though they lay traps for me, I’ll flee from them. The righteous will always prevail over evil.”
These are the words of Attorney-General, Godfred Yeboah Dame, in response to recent developments in the ambulance purchase trial.
Lawyers of the first and third accused in the matter have filed four applications at the High Court in relation to his alleged conduct as a prosecutor in the case.
There’s an application for stay of proceedings pending appeal as well as an application for enquiry into the alleged conduct of the Attorney-General and a mistrial by Dr Ato Forson’s lawyers.
Again, there’s an application for an order striking out charges against third accused Richard Jakpa and an affidavit in support of the application by Jakpa by the former Deputy Finance Minister.
When the case was called on Thursday, June 4, presiding judge, Afia Serwah Asare Botwe indicated that she had received the four applications by the accused persons.
Deputy Attorney-General, Alfred Tuah Yeboah indicated that they had filed an affidavit in opposition to the application for charges against Richard Jakpa to be struck out.
Responding, lead counsel for Richard Jakpa, Thaddeus Sory moved a motion to object the affidavit in opposition.
He argued that the document failed to cite the source of the information regarding the conversation between the A-G and Richard Jakpa.
“We are opposed to the affidavit in opposition filed by the respondent on 31 May 2024 on two main grounds: That affidavit fails to disclose the source of the information in respect of the matters contained in the affidavit, specifically matters relating to the A3’s direct conversation with the A-G. It contains matters which are not in his personal knowledge and are therefore inadmissible on ground of being hearsay. P13, 16 and 20 of the affidavits in opposition and the deposition on which they are supposed to have been found, which is paragraph 1.
“That deposition does not disclose the source of the information contained in this affidavit in opposition. Being a principal state at the office of the Attorney-General does not mean you have personal knowledge of direct interactions that took place between the A3 and A-G. He refers to matters that took place in chambers and he wasn’t there. He refers to meeting held at the residence of a Supreme Court judge which he was not there,” Thaddeus noted.
But in response, Attorney-General Godfred Yeboah Dame said the arguments were without merit.
“The objections are duly unfounded and are without merit. The manner in which the objection was raised defeats all requirements of fairness. My lady will note that my learned friend did not state any particulars of the objection. He only refers to specific paragraphs he intends to attack.
“It is not accurate at all for counsel to say that deponent to the affidavit did not disclose the source of his information. I refer to paragraph 1… matters that come to his knowledge in the course of his work.
“The authorities that my learned friend intended to rely on are irrelevant. In criminal matters he refers to nothing. CI 47 is not applicable to the proceedings before you.
