En Huang, aka Aisha Huang, a Chinese woman in the middle of an illegal mining controversy, is challenging the authenticity of videos and images captured by the investigator in her trial.
According to Aisha Huang, the videos and images submitted to the trial court by the investigator, ASP Charles Adaba (Rtd), had no GPS addresses indicating where they were captured.
Speaking through her led counsel, Miracle Attachey, she claimed the video footages and images tendered before the court by the investigator could be from any geographical location in the country.
Aisha Huang’s counsel explained to the court, presided over by Justice Lydia Osei Marfo, last week, that the drone that was used to capture the supposed images of illegal mining had an inbuilt system that labels addresses on images.
Mr. Attachey also accused the investigator of not being led by the arresting Ghana Immigration Service (GIS) officers to the supposed site where the four Chinese men were apprehended.
The investigator, in response during cross examination, said he was not an IT person, and also not the one who operated the drone that took the images.
He further told the court that although he did not go to the alleged galamsey site with the arresting officers, he, together with two others, were led by the Chief and elders of Bepotenten, the area to the illegal site called Sukumo and Gyaman.
The court was equally told that the investigator received briefing from the GIS Director of Operations, Charles Y. Bediako, before embarking on his trip to Bepotenten in the Ashanti Region.
The following are excerpts of the cross-examination.
Q. Can you tell this honourable court when you visited Bepotenten?
A. In June, 2017.
A. Before this visit on June 8, 2017, had you visited Bepotenten before?
A. No.
Q. Can you tell this honourable court the purpose of your visit to Bepotenten on June 8, 2017?
A. I visited Bepotenten on investigations in the case of operating illegal mining by the accused and four others.
Q. Did you visit Bepotenten alone or you went as a group?
A. I went with a driver and another person for security reasons.
Q. What is the name of this other person?
A. DSP Justice Oppong (rtd), also known as Nana Oppong.
Q. He works with the Ghana Police Service, not so?
A. Yes, my lady.
Q. Apart from the visit of June 2017, did you visit Bepotenten again?
A. Yes.
Q. When was that?
A. My lady, I’m not very sure of the date.
Q. On this other visit to Bepotenten, who did you go with?
A. I went with Nana Oppong.
Q. So you will agree with me that on all your visits you went with no immigration officer, but only Nana Oppong and the driver?
A. Yes.
Q. You will agree with me that Nana Oppong and the driver, including you were, were not part of the arresting officers of the four Chinese and the accused?
A. It is in my evidence-in-chief that I was not part of the arresting officers.
Q. I’m putting it to you that Nana Oppong and the driver were not part of the arresting officers of the accused person and the four Chinese men?
A. I’m in court as an individual and he is talking about Nana Oppong and the driver.
Q. So can you tell this honourable court who took you as the investigator to this alleged site that you took videos and images of?
A. I visited Bepotenten, and I first met the Odikro of the village to know my mission at Bepotenten and Odikro brought his elders and I explained to them why I was at Bepotenten, and he asked one Okyeame Appiah , Mr. Amenye and one Tey to led me to the site. So these are the people who led me to the site.
Q. These people you mentioned earlier- Odikro, Okyeame Appiah, Amenyah, and one Tey – were also not part of the arresting team, I put that to you?
A. My lady, when the case was referred to me on April 23, 2017, the accused person and the four Chinese men had already been arrested by the GIS and were being investigated for an immigration offence by the GIS. I was asked to investigate the criminal activities of the accused and the four Chinese men.
So the accused persons were already in custody before I started the criminal investigation. So I was not at the site when they were arrested. So I cannot tell that these persons I mentioned were there.
Q. Can you tell the court where exactly the four Chinese men were arrested?
A. My lady, from my investigations they were arrested at the Sukumu site.
Q. As an investigator, you saw no need to go to Bepotenten with the arresting officers to show you where the four Chinese men were arrested?
A. My lady, in my evidence-in-chief, I said when the case was referred to me I visited the GIS Headquarters, and I met the Director of Operations, Charles Y. Bediako, and I had a brief from him, and I met the four Chinese men and the accused person herein. From the briefing from the Director of Operations at the GIS Head Office, so I met the Odikro and they took me to the arresting site.
Q. So it is the basis on this information you gathered from the people you mentioned above that you went on [a]shooting spree of videos and sill images of land sites which you have put before this honourable court as Exhibit B series?
A. It is investigations that took me to the site to establish where the accused persons were working.
Q. Let’s go to the images. You labeled the files marked Exhibit B series?
A. Yes.
Q. And these Exhibit B series were images and videos taken by drone?
A. Yes, it was operated by a person.
Q. And this drone is operated by an app by the operator, which has a global position in the system (GPS); you would agree with me sir?
A. I do not agree.
Q. On the face of Exhibit B series there is no GPS, geographic location, let alone to talk about a location generated by drone or in the still image, apart from your labelling of that video?
A. My lord, I’m not an IT person. The operator I went with to the site took the recordings in the presence of me, including those that I have mentioned. Even though it may not have the GPS on the exhibits that I labelled at the various places that I labelled Sukumo and Gyama.
Q. At the last hearing date, you admitted that on one of your videos you did a mistake. Is that so?
A. I did not make a mistake.
Q. Did you meet Honourable Matthew Kwabena Abotsi during your investigations?
A. …
Q. So you will agree with me that the Exhibit B series could be a location anywhere in this country on the face of it or anywhere – example Ashanti Gold.
A. I don’t agree with counsel, because these images were taken at Sukumo and Gyaman.
Q. In your investigations, you mentioned excavators allegedly belonging to the accused person?
A. I did not say excavators, I said, when I visited the site there was an excavator that had been dismantled and under repairs.
Q. In your investigations did you find out the ownership of that excavator…?
A. It belonged to the accused person and a company called Golden Aisa Company Limited.
Q. As you are before this court there is no evidence or document relating to the ownership of the said excavator by the accused person or Aisa Golden Limited, I put that to you?
A. I disagree.
Q. You gave evidence on Mover 1, 2018, in a case titled Republic Versus En Hung and four other case No: CR3442/2917 is that not so sir?
A. That is correct.
Q. Have you heard of the name Nana Kofi Prempeh Zambrah, Kwame Amano, Samson Kofi Wiredu, and Edward Koranteng during your investigations?
A. My lady, Prempeh sound familiar in my ears if he can identify the people to me I can say I know them all.
Q. Did you have the opportunity to interrogate any of the people mentioned above?
A. My lord, it being six years now if he can tell the people I will be able to tell whether I had an interaction with them or not.
Q. You will agree with me that these charges levelled against the Accused person are based on happenings on 2017?
A. Based on the investigation I conducted in 2017/18.
Counsel: On this good not I’m done.
Prosecution: no re-examination.
