The trial of the former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD), Dr. Stephen Kwabena Opuni, and two others has taken a new twist, as the prosecution, for the second time, has asked for a further adjournment to chase witnesses.
According to the prosecution, it was having a difficult time in locating some of its witnesses.
The prosecution had earlier expressed its inability to get witnesses to testify, after the court held that the six years old suit should start ‘De Novo’.
The prosecution, led by Chief State Attorney (CSA) Evelyn Keelson, informed the Land Division of the Accra High Court of their challenge yesterday.
She, therefore, prayed the court, presided over by Justice Kwasi Anokye Gyimah, to adjourn the case to enable them put their house in order.
The court granted the prayer and adjourned proceedings to July 12, this year.
Court of Appeal hearing
In a related case, an appeal filed by the Attorney General (A-G), Godfred Dame Yeboah, against the ruling of the High Court was also called at the Court of Appeal yesterday.
However, the appellant court has given June 14, 2023, to rule on some legal objections that were raised by the counsel in the trial.
According to Samuel Cudjoe, counsel for Dr. Opuni, the appeal filed by the A-G had missing pages, as well as words.
He said the practice of the Court of Appeal was that they gave the full complement of the records to parties, then the Registrar would write to the parties to go through, after which they would send their comments that the records were aligned.
He added that it was the responsibility of the Registrar to ensure that the entire record brought to court was not half, as they had done in this case.
Mr. Cudjoe urged the appellant court to order the Registrar of the High Court to properly compile and resubmit the entire records.
“This act we submit in the Court of Appeal not having the full records to make an informed decision with respect to the appeal,” he said.
Benson Nutsukpi, counsel for the second and third accused persons – Seidu Agongo and Agricult Ghana Limited – associated himself with the concerns raised by the first accused’s lawyer, Mr. Cudjoe.
According to him, he had also seen a series of mistakes in the proceedings, and per the practice, they were to be served the full records of the proceedings.
But Mr. Dame, on the other hand, opposed the application, arguing that it was totally unsupported by any rule of procedure so far as proceedings were concerned.
He said the court would note that the conduct of criminal cases by the Court of Appeal was regulated by Constitutional Instrument (CI) 19, for which it drew a distinction between proceedings of civil and criminal appeals.
He explained that whereas in a civil appeal there was the involvement of parties in determining what ought to go into the record, the court would note that same was completely omitted when it came to the conduct of a criminal appeal.
“Parties are wholly excluded in determining what goes into the records of determining the appeal,” he added.
“Rules 11 and 14 which are in the civil rules of C.I.19 and those rules show clearly that the parties first have the liberty to determine what goes into the records and they can even suggest to the Registrar an exclusion or inclusion of which documents in the records.”
He stressed that the constitutional provision that deals with fair trial was Article 19, and except where an act by a person, whether the Registrar or the prosecution, infringes on Article 19, that act could not be said to be a violation on the right of an accused person.
Mr. Dame said the application by counsel for the accused was unknown to the court, and the luxury entendres to them by serving them with the record of proceedings.
He added that the record contains over 4,000 pages, therefore, the omission of about 25 pages cannot be said to be of substantial prejudice to the case of the respondents or accused persons.
