The embattled Minority Leader, Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson, is requesting a live telecast of subsequent court proceedings regarding his trial in the ambulance case.
He has subsequently written an official letter to the Chief Justice, through his lawyers, Azizbamba & Associates, affirming his request.
“We write to formally request the live broadcast of all subsequent court proceedings in the case of Republic vs. Cassiel Ato Forson & 2 Others (Case No: CR/0198/2022),” the letter said.
The lawyers said their client had requested full media access and a live broadcast of the court proceedings, following recent developments regarding the matter.
These supposed developments, the letter explained, have significantly impacted public perceptions about the administration of justice.
READ THE FULL LETTER BELOW;
REQUEST FOR FULL MEDIA ACCESS, INCLUDING LIVE BROADCAST OF SUBSEQUENT COURT PROCEEDINGS
We represent and hold the instructions of Honourable Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson (“our Client”) in respect of the above-referenced case, which is pending before the High Court, Accra (Financial & Economic Division “2”).
We write to formally request the live broadcast of all subsequent court proceedings in the case of Republic vs. Cassiel Ato Forson & 2 Ors (Case No: CR/0198/2022).
This request is made on behalf of our Client in the light of recent developments that have significantly impacted public perception of the case and the administration of justice.
Our Client, Honourable Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson, is the Minority Leader in Parliament and the Member of Parliament for the Ajumako Enyan Esiam Constituency in the Central Region of Ghana.
He was arraigned before the High Court, Accra (Financial & Economic Division “2”) on 17th January 2022 and charged with wilfully causing financial loss to the Republic and intentionally misapplying public property.
He pleaded not guilty to the charges.
The prosecution closed its case on 14th February 2023 and on a submission of no case the court ruled that the accused persons, including our Client, had a case to answer.
In the ruling on the submission of no case to answer, the trial court held, inter alia, as follows:
“On the part of Al, he insists that he had the authority of the Minister of Finance, whose deputy he was, to issue the request. That said, however, the law is clear, that where a negative averment is made, in this case, that Al acted without authority, and then there is a positive one, the onus is on the one making the positive assertion to prove the positive…
In such circumstances, it is for Al to adduce evidence to show that he had authority. The burden on the accused person, however, is not as high as that on the prosecution. The accused person only needs to raise a reasonable doubt.” (pp 43 of the ruling)
The Law Office of Azizbamba & Associates
