In a landmark ruling, the Court of Appeal has acquitted and discharged Dr Ato Forson and others in the high-profile Ambulance case, overturning the High Court’s earlier decision.
The Minority Leader had gone to the Appeal Court to challenge the dismissal of ‘submission of no case’ argument he made at the lower court.
The Court of Appeal’s panel, which was made up of Justices Alex Poku Acheampong, Kweku Tawiah Ackah-Boafo and Philip Bright Mensah granted the appeal in a 2-1 decision.
The court reached a majority decision to uphold the ‘submission of no case’, with Justices Ackah-Boafo and Mensah in favour, while Justice Acheampong dissented.
Justice Kweku Tawiah Ackah-Boafo, delivering the majority opinion, ruled that the prosecution had failed to present sufficient evidence against the accused.
The court found that the evidence presented was based on impermissible speculations and did not establish a direct link between the evidence and the actions of the third accused.
As a result, the court concluded that there was no reasonable basis for the accused to be compelled to open their defense.
Justice Philip Bright Mensah echoed similar sentiments, emphasising that the prosecution’s case was weak and lacked reliability.
He noted that the delays and issues with the ambulances were not attributable to A1, as the Ministry of Health was responsible for pre-inspection, which it failed to perform.
Consequently, any financial loss should be attributed to the ministry’s mishandling rather than the accused.
In dissenting opinion, Justice Alex Poku Acheampong argued that the trial judge was correct in deciding that the accused should answer the charges. Despite the dissent, the majority ruling prevailed, leading to the acquittal and discharge of all accused individuals.
The Court of Appeal’s ruling marks a significant development in the case, with the appellate court setting aside the High Court’s order and acquitting the accused of all charges.
The decision underscores the appellate court’s finding that the prosecution’s case was insufficient to warrant further defence from the accused.
