Afred Agbesi Woyome
The Supreme Court has set a new date to deliver its judgment on some properties said to belong to embattled NDC financier, Agbesi Woyome, which the state wants to confiscate to offset the GH¢51.2 million he fraudulently received as judgment debt.
The court had set January 21, 2019, to deliver its judgment on claims by defunct UT Bank that the properties identified belong to the bank which is in receivership and cannot be confiscated by the state.
But the judgment was indefinitely suspended following an application by Woyome’s lawyers for a review of the decision of the court presided over by a single judge, Justice Alfred A. Benin, to dismiss an objection seeking the court to have the ongoing proceedings moved to the High Court.
But the review panel of three justices presided over by Justice Julius Ansah dismissed the application giving way for the single judge to go ahead with his judgment.
The court was yesterday expected to deliver the judgment which would determine whether the identified properties belong to Woyome or UT Bank.
The judgment has, however, been adjourned to June 27 following the filing of fresh processes by Anator Holdings which is claiming ownership of a quarry which the state says belongs to Mr. Woyome.
Sources say the judge had already written his judgment on the claims by the defunct bank but has decided to ‘incorporate’ the latest processes filed by Anator Holdings in the final decision.
According to the source, the judge does not want to give two separate judgments in a matter which is considered to be the same, hence the adjournment.
Identified properties
The state in its efforts to recover the GH¢51.2 million the NDC financier fraudulently received as judgment debt has identified five properties belonging to Woyome each worth about $1.5 million.
Moves by the state to confiscate the properties it has identified were truncated by claims that some of those properties were not his but rather belong to others.
The receiver of UT Bank, Eric Nana Nipa, in his witness statement to the apex court, claimed the bank acquired the properties from Mr. Woyome on April 5, 2013 and May 13, 2014.
Collusion
Deputy Attorney General, Godfred Yeboah, who cross-examined the receiver, pointed out inaccuracies in statements by UT Bank, insisting that the claims are instruments of deceit to frustrate efforts by the state to execute the judgment of the Supreme Court.
During cross-examination, Mr. Dame revealed that there was no deed of transfer between Woyome and UT Bank which guarantees the bank the right to lay claim to the properties in question.
Interestingly, all documents filed by UT Bank, including the land title certificates and site plans of the said properties, are all in the name of Mr. Woyome.
Mr. Dame accused the receivers of UT bank of colluding with Mr. Woyome to frustrate efforts by the state to sell the properties.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak