[ 2012-06-11 ]

Martin Amidu condemns govt’s ‘selective justice’ in Woyome case
Former Attorney General Martin Amidu has described
the re-arrest of Alfred Woyome as one smacking of
selective justice, adding the development
"portrays him as a sacrificial lamb".

He is therefore asking government to explain to
the Ghanaians public, its reasons for doing so and
leaving out two others in the controversial
judgment debt case.

In a statement released Monday morning, Mr Amidu
also questioned government’s decision to discharge
Chief State Attorney Samuel Nerquaye Tetteh and
his wife Gifty Tetteh.

Below is the full statement

MARTIN AMIDU’S PERSPECTIVE ON THE NOLLE PROSEQUI
IN THE WOYOME CASE: BY MARTIN A. B. K. AMIDU

As you all must know by now, on Monday, 4th June
2012 the High Court trying the Woyome case was
given the assurance that the trial will commence
on 5th June 2012. On 5th June 2012 the charges
against the accused persons were discontinued by
the entry of a nolle prosequi and all the accused
discharged. Alfred Agbesi Woyome was alone
rearrested and charged with two offences and the
case adjourned.

I had demanded as Attorney-General, and continue
to advocate as a citizen of Ghana, for the
retrieval of the sum of GH¢51 million plus
involved in the GARGANTUAN FRAUD and the
prosecution of the perpetrators of the fraud on
the Republic of Ghana. The name Alfred Agbesi
Woyome came to symbolize the suspected fraud as a
systemic problem that needed to be dealt with in
accordance with the due process of law in the hope
of preventing any future recurrence. Mr. Woyome as
a person was not the problem. The problem was and
is the system and method used to commit such
suspected fraud on the Republic. In my respectful
view, to isolate Mr. Alfred Agbesi Woyome alone
for prosecution smacks of personalizing the
problem, selective justice, is inequitable, and
portrays him as a sacrificial lamb.

The circus that started with the arrest of Mr.
Woyome and 3 others by the police; their being
charged before the High Court; the several
adjournments and promises of a trial; and the
eventual discharge of all the accused on 5th June
2012; and the subsequent immediate rearrest of Mr.
Woyome alone for trial needs to be explained to
the public. Did Mr. Woyome walk alone to the Bank
to defraud Ghana of GH¢51 million plus? Did any
other person(s) facilitate the commission of the
suspected fraud? Were there supporting documents
and letters from any accomplices that convinced
the Attorney-General of the veracity of settling
the claim and ordering payments? In this regard,
several letters and documents published by the
“New Crusading Guide” newspaper which are not on
the incomplete file in the Attorney-General’s
Office point to collusion and collaboration. The
Attorney-General’s main file was said to have been
missing since 2006 and the case was settled
without even any of the signed contracts between
Waterville and the Government of Ghana on the
files of the Attorney-General’s Department.

By convention, the Attorney-General does not need
to explain to the Court why he enters a nolle
prosequi. But I have no doubt whatsoever that
under the Constitution the public has a right to
comment and react to the exercise of that right
when there are matters of national and
constitutional interest arising from such a
decision. The late Mr. Justice A. N. E. Amissah
accurately states the position in his “Criminal
Procedure in Ghana” as follows:

“The power of the Attorney-General to discontinue
a case by the entry of a nolle prosequi or
withdrawal is political in nature. No law
prescribes the conditions under which it should be
exercised or requires that he explains the reasons
under which it should be exercised or requires
that he explains the reasons for doing so.
However, if he does so improperly this might have
serious political consequences for the Government
of which he is a member or result in his personal
fall from office….the entry of a nolle prosequi in
the famous Campbell case which had political
overtones led to the fall of the first Labour
Government in 1924…”

The Attorney-General’s Office is one place where
the Republic expects integrity and trust in the
settlement of legitimate legal claims on behalf of
“We the People”. In this Mr. Woyome case, Mr.
Nerquaye-Tetteh, Chief State Attorney, was working
under me and in charge of the Woyome case urging
me in November 2011 to withdraw the case from
Court for a settlement. As late as December 2011
he was urging me to sign a letter to the Minister
of Finance to facilitate the withdrawal of the
case and the payment of an additional GH¢9 million
plus to Mr. Woyome as interest which I refused to
sign. The Economic and Organized Crime Report
reveals that his wife’s account was credited with
GH¢400,000.00 in June 2011 while Mr.
Nerquaye-Tetteh was still the Chief State Attorney
in charge of the case. Both he and his wife have
been discharged by the Attorney-Generals’ entry of
nolle prosequi without any explanation whatsoever
and are at liberty to leave the jurisdiction. But
this is the key person upon whom the
Attorney-General, whom, the Government and
Parliament knew from day one, had never practised
seriously before any Court of record, depended
upon in the whole transaction.

I remember vividly one of the prosecutors in the
case lamenting when Mr. Nerquaye-Tetteh became a
suspect about how she could prosecute him. I
reminded her that crime is crime and it was more
important for the Attorney-General’s Department
where one of its numbers goes wrong to redeem its
credibility by dealing with the person resolutely
to restore the confidence of the public in the
Department. Is the nolle prosequi entered in
respect of Nerquaye-Tetteh and Gifty
Nerquaye-Tetteh intended to protect the
Attorney-General’s own staff and spouse or did the
Economic and Organized Crime Office mislead the
public by the findings it made in its report? What
has happened to the foreign companies that wrote
letters, signed agreements, and deposed to facts
supporting the claim of Mr. Woyome?

It is in the interest of the NDC as political
party to encourage the Government to explain, in
this election year, the reasons for the entry of
the nolle prosequi and the rearrest in the manner
it took place and what the stakes are for other
suspects. A nolle prosequi is of a political
nature and as political animals the electorate who
have to decide on 7th December 2012 should not be
left guessing whether or not Mr. Woyome is a mere
sacrificial lamb for electoral purposes or that
the NDC and the Government are really determined
to fight crime as crime in a systemic manner.

As to the question of me relying on the
Attorney-General’s integrity to handle the case
with honesty, I am unable to do so because any
lawyer in public office who is shown by police
investigations to have manufactured an
assassination attempt on himself is not worth the
high moral character and proven integrity for that
quasi judicial office. And the same Government
still expects the public to trust the fairness of
the Deputy Attorney-General who saw nothing wrong
with the payment in the first place. “We the
People” have a political right to be informed of
the Government’s intentions.

Martin A. B. K. Amidu

Source - MyjoyOnline

... go Back