Dr. Stephen Kwabena Opuni
An Accra High Court has ordered the Attorney General to furnish the embattled former Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD), Dr. Stephen Kwabena Opuni, with all relevant documents she intends to rely on in prosecuting him for causing financial loss to the state.
The documents, the court noted, consist of all documents in their possession including those they do not intend to tender as evidence as the accused persons may rely on them for their defence.
The AG’s Office is also to provide Dr. Opuni and his alleged accomplice, Seidu Agongo, Managing Director of Agricult Ghana Limited, with all witness statements before witnesses are called to testify in the matter.
The prosecution has up to seven days within which to file the documents at the court’s registry, and inform the accused persons to pick them up.
The court’s order comes at the back of the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Article 19 Clause 2 E and G of the 1992 Constitution which states that accused persons must be given adequate time and facility to defend themselves.
The true meaning of the article had been a thorny issue in trials on indictment until the apex court interpreted it to mean that the accused persons are entitled to disclosure to avoid convicting innocent persons.
The High Court hearing the Opuni case had on two occasions adjourned the trial, following an application by Samuel Codjoe, lawyer for Dr. Opuni, praying the court to order the prosecution to furnish his client with all documents including those they do not intend to tender in evidence.
Application
Moving the motion, Mr. Codjoe said on a true and proper interpretation of the Article, his client was entitled to all the documents “which has come into the possession, custody and knowledge of the prosecution in the course of their investigation” leading to the prosecution of Dr. Opuni.
He averred that Dr. Opuni was an official of the COCOBOD and never acted in his private capacity hence does not have a copy of the letters and documents referred to by the prosecution in their facts to the court.
Some of the documents include all certificate issued by CRIG for all fertilizers including Lithovit Foliar Fertilizer from 2008 till March 2018 as well as renewals of all such certificates.
“All letters written by COCOBOD through 1st accused (Dr. Opuni) to the Public Procurement Authority (PPA) for permission to sole source contracts for all fertilizers”.
Shadow-Boxing
Deputy Attorney General, Godfred Yeboah Dame, in his affidavit in opposition to the application accused Dr. Opuni’s lawyer of shadow-boxing – avoiding the substantive case and rather employing delay tactics.
He described as “needless, speculative and illegitimate” some of the documents Dr. Opuni was requesting, saying they are not relevant or related to the trial.
For instance, he averred that the request by the lawyer that the AG furnishes Dr. Opuni with all witness statements of Seidu Agongo and Agricult Ghana Limited is utterly unfounded because the two are not witnesses hence cannot give witness statements.
He said the trial has a specific reference of time which is between 2013 and 2018. It is therefore irrelevant for the lawyer to be requesting documents from 2008 when Dr. Opuni was not at COCOBOD as CEO.
He expressed the readiness of the AG’s office to provide the accused person with all relevant documents, including letters and contracts he signed during his time as COCOBOD boss.
Speedy Trial
Meanwhile, Justice Clemence Honyenugah, an Appeal Court judge sitting as an additional High Court judge has told both the prosecution and the defence lawyers to brace themselves up for a speedy trial. According to him, he will not countenance any adjournments and thus asked the prosecution to file the documents on time.
The defence is also to ensure that they pick the documents on time soon as they are filed.
The matter has been adjourned to July 4, 2018.
Background
Dr. Stephen Opuni and a private businessman, Seidu Agongo, have been sued by the AG for causing financial loss to the state totaling GH¢217,370,289.22.
The two are facing a total of 27 charges including defrauding by false pretense, willfully causing financial loss to the state, money laundering, corruption by a public officer and contravention of the Public Procurement Act.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak