The High Court has dismissed a motion filed by counsel for Seidu Agongo, the CEO of Agricult Ghana Limited, to say proceedings pending interlocutory appeal.
The court was of the view that granting the application will cause the case to delay, adding that a notice of appeal was not enough grounds to stay proceedings.
The trial judge, Mr. Justice Clemence Honyenuga, a justice of the Court of Appeal with additional responsibility as a High Court judge also rejected claim by Benson Nutsukpui, counsel for the accused, that an investigative report filed by CRIG in court, should be considered as an official document.
The report in question is the outcome of the work of a committee set up by the Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana (CRIG) of COCOBOD to investigate the missing of some documents in its custody, which was filed on the orders of the court.
The position that because the document was filed by lawyers of COCOBOD on behalf of CRIG, it is official document is “neither here nor there”, Mr. Justice Clemence Honyenuga asserted.
The report, which defence counsel maintained vindicates the accused in the sense that the fertilizer supplied to COCOBOD by Agricult was liquid and not powdery as suggested by prosecution, was rejected by the court when defence counsel tried to tender it in evidence through second prosecution witness Dr. Alfred Arthur.
Benson Nutsukpui has taken the issue to the Appeals Court to get that decision of the High Court quashed.
He subsequently filed a motion at the court to stay proceedings pending the interlocutory appeal, which was heard on Monday March 18.
Read: Agongo heads to Appeals Court as High Court ‘rejects’ COCOBOD report
In moving the motion, Benson Nutsukpui said his client has filed 27-paragraph affidavits and wished to rely on all the paragraphs.
He had suggested in his argument asking the court to stay proceedings that the rejected report is an official document from CRIG.
“The crux of this application is that the bone of contention is that CRIG, which is the testing authority of COCOBOD, is aware of the product known or referred to as Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer…prosecution witness was emphatic and specific that the product was unknown to COCOBOD,” he pointed out.
“What we have sought to do is to confront the witness with official documentary evidence coming from the custody of CRIG which states how the product was referred to in their correspondence.”
He said this was a reason why Mr Agongo appealed to the court for all those documents to be provided to him, especially the letter coming from the Directors of CRIG, demanding that Mr Agongo paid money for a sensitization training for farmers and Cocoa Health and Extension Division (CHED) staff on the use of Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer.
Benson Nutsukpui also stated the decision of the court on February 25 deprived the accused persons of their constitutional right to fair trial as stipulated under Article 19 of the Constitution. He said it also closes the door to the submission of no case, when the court said he should have rather applied to subpoena the authors of the report on the missing documents.
Allowing the ruling of the High Court to stand would amount to substantial “miscarriage of justice”, he asserted.
[caption id="attachment_116839" align="aligncenter" width="800"]
Second prosecution witness, Dr. Alfred Arhtur of CRIG[/caption]
Opposing view
But Senior State Attorney Mrs Stella Ohene Appiah said the prosecution opposed to the granting of the motion for stay of proceedings, adding that the court ruling in February was “proper and based on law for which matter, the appeal filed by the second and third accused persons in our opinion will not succeed.”
Stressing that the stay of proceedings is not a right but a discretion of the court, she also said granting the application would “delay the case unnecessarily and result in chaos”.
Ruling
The presiding Judge, Justice Honyenugah, ruled that granting the application to stay proceedings was a discretionary one and that a notice of appeal was not enough grounds to stay proceedings.
He also clarified, “I must state that, I have never thought or imagine that my ruling was meant to prevent the second and third accused persons from submitting a no case…or denied the accused persons their right to fair trial.”
He stressed that the court did not order Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana (CRIG) to set up the committee to investigate the missing documents, but asked that a copy of the report of the committee should be served to the court and counsel “as a matter of information”
Therefore, he maintained, “the impression created that the document is an official document is neither here nor there”.
Justice Honyenugah in dismissing the motion concluded, “I fail to see any special grounds to grant the application”.
The court therefore adjourned the trial to Wednesday, March 27 for continuation
Dr Stephen Opuni, a former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD), and Mr Agongo, the CEO of Agricult Ghana Limited, are on trial for their alleged engagement in acts that incurred financial loss of GH¢271.3m to the state in a series of fertiliser deals.
They have been charged with 27 counts, including wilfully causing financial loss to the state, contravention of the Public Procurement Act, defrauding by false pretence, money laundering and corruption of a public officer.
The two have pleaded not guilty to all the charges and are on self-recognisance bail of GH¢300,000 each.
Read also: Opuni, Agongo trial: Court rejects tendering of report on missing document
By Isaac Essel | 3news.com | Ghana]]>
