William Ato Essien
The fate of founder and former Chief Executive Officer of defunct Capital Bank, William Ato Essien, hangs in the balance as an Accra High Court will today decide whether to accept the agreement between him and the Office of the Attorney General to repay the money he stole from the bank in 2015.
The court, presided over by Justice Eric Kyei Baffour, would either accept the deal if his lawyer and the prosecution are able to convince the court that the case falls under Section 35 of the Courts Act or go ahead to deliver his judgment in the case which had travelled for a little over three years.
The court on December 1, 2022, rejected the GH¢90 million restitution agreement between the accused and the prosecution and adjourned the case for the parties to reconsider the amount to be repaid as restitution and whether Section 35 of the Courts Acts apply in the instant case.
Ato Essien is on trial with the defunct bank’s former Managing Director, Fitzgerald Odonkor as well as Tetteh Nettey, a former Managing Director of MC Management Service owned by Mr. Essien, for stealing from the GH¢620 million liquidity support given to the struggling bank by the Bank of Ghana.
Mr. Essien, who is facing 16 counts of conspiracy to steal and stealing, reached an agreement with the Office of the Attorney General to plead guilty to the charges levelled against him and is willing to repay GH¢90 million as restitution and compensation under Section 35 of the Courts Act. He has already paid GH¢30 million.
Section 35 of the Act states that, “Where a person is charged with an offence before the High Court or a Regional Tribunal, the commission of which has caused economic loss, harm or damage to the state or any state agency, the accused may inform the prosecutor whether the accused admits the offence and is willing to offer compensation or make restitution and reparation for the loss, harm or damage caused.”
The trial court on December 1, was ready to deliver its judgment in the case, but Justice Kyei-Baffour announced the agreement between the accused and the prosecution.
The court, however, rejected the agreement, indicating that the terms are not acceptable to the court. He said the money was stolen in 2015 at the time when the exchange rate was GH¢3.70 to $1 and allowing Ato Essien to pay GH¢90 million seven years down the line would be making crime attractive.
He said Section 35 of the Courts Act covers offences that result in loss or damage to the state or an agency of the state, but this case in his opinion does not occasion any loss or damage on the state or its agency, but instead on the bank and its depositors as all the charges make reference to money stolen from Capital Bank.
Justice Kyei Baffour held that it is not lost on the court that the liquidity support was given by the Bank of Ghana, but that support is a loan given to the defunct bank and the fact that government had to indemnify depositors did not make the money that of the state.
He, therefore, rejected the terms of settlement and adjourned the case to December 13, 2022, to allow the parties to discuss the exact amount to be paid and to address the court on whether Section 35 of the Courts Act is applicable in this case.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak