Solomon Asamoah
Lawyers for former Chief Executive Officer of Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF), Solomon Asamoah, have challenged the claims by the Attorney General’s first witness that the controversial Sky Train project was only mentioned once at the Fund’s board meetings.
Victoria Barth, lead counsel for Mr. Asamoah, during her cross-examination of the witness, Yaw Odame-Darkwa, tendered several minutes of the GIIF board which all mentioned the project, contrary to the witness’ claims in his evidence-in-chief.
“You will agree with me that I have shown you at least eight board minutes which refer to the Sky Train project, would you not?” Ms. Barth asked and the witness said “Yes.”
Trial
Former Chief Executive Officer of GIIF, Solomon Asamoah and the erstwhile Board Chairman of the Fund, Prof. Christopher Ameyaw-Akumfi have been charged before a High Court in Accra for their alleged involvement in unapproved $2 million investment which allegedly resulted in financial loss to the state.
The prosecution’s first witness, Yaw Odame-Darkwa, in his testimony, had claimed that although minutes from the board meeting referred to the project, the minutes do not accurately reflect the board’s deliberations or decisions concerning the Sky Train project at any time.
He also indicated that the Sky Train concept was only introduced at one of the Board’s meetings, claiming that the board did not receive any substantive proposal on the project and hence it did not deliberate or take any decision on the project.
Cross-examination
Victoria Barth, in a further cross-examination of the witness, focused primarily on three areas; his membership on several boards – including a company he incorporated, his caution statements to investigators, and minutes of GIIF board meetings which mentioned the Sky Train project.
She tendered through the witness, about nine (9) minutes which all mentioned the project, contrary to the witness’ earlier claim that it was mentioned only once.
In spite of this, Mr. Odame-Darkwa responded “no” when he was asked “it cannot be correct when you say in paragraph 11 of your witness statement filed on June 23, 2025, that the Sky Train concept was only introduced at one of the board meetings.”
“No, My Lady, the minutes that you showed me also have other projects also being repeated,” he added.
Can’t Recollect Statement
The witness also told the court he could not remember giving an investigation caution statement to investigators at the National Intelligence Bureau on May 23, 2025, since it did not capture his signature, although he had previously answered “that is so,” when asked if he gave a statement on that day.
“Again, on May 23, 2025, you gave another statement to the NIB. Did you not?” Madam Barth asked, and Mr. Yaw Odame-Darkwa answered “That is so.”
Although the content of the statement was not read to the court, it contains the handwriting of Mr. Odame-Darkwa, indicating his name, residential address, postal address and occupation, while the rest of the writings are in a different handwriting.
“So, did you make that statement or not?” the lawyer asked. “I don’t see my signature on it so I cannot speak to it,” the witness answered.
“So, despite your handwriting appearing on the document, are you saying that you do not wish for this court to rely on that document as a statement you gave?” Madam Barth queried. “My lady, I don’t have that power,” the witness responded.
“The document in your handwriting has been presented as part of documents that the prosecution obtained from the lead investigator of the Sky Train transaction and which document the prosecution intends to rely on as evidence in this suit. This document is ascribed to you, and I simply need you to confirm whether you made it or not. If you do not remember you may say so,” the lawyer further pressed.
“I do not remember,” the witness answered.
The case has been adjourned to November 19, 2025.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak