An Accra High Court has expressed frustration about the “delay tactics” being employed
by State Prosecutors in commencing the trial of former president of the Ghana Football
Association (GFA) Kwasi Nyantakyi.
The Court was also unhappy about the substantive State Prosecutor’s request to prioritize an
“official assignment” at the expense of the “prosecution of a criminal trial at the High Court.”
Justice Marie-Louise Simmons the presiding judge previously warned that, “if by the end of
April no meaningful steps have been taken in the appeal the two accused persons would be
discharged.”
However, the warning did not take effect as the case has been adjourned to June 10.
The former President of the GFA has been charged with fraud and corruption over his
involvement in the Anas Aremeyaw Anas #Number 12 Exposé.’
Mr. Nyantakyi who is also facing the charge of Conspiracy to commit fraud with the former
Northern Regional Representative of the GFA, Abdulai Alhassan, pleaded not guilty.
The two football administrators have been admitted to their previous bail sum of GHc1 million
each with three sureties, to be justified.
They are also to report to the case investigator until the final determination of the case.
In Court on Tuesday, April 30, however, Justice Marie-Louise Simmons, said the Court has been
informed of challenges at the registry regarding the appeal.
Based on that, the Court said, it would not discharge the accused persons as previously stated but
would wait for the outcome of the Court of Appeal outcome where both the prosecution and
accused filed motions.
EIB Network’s Legal Affairs Correspondent, Murtala Inusah, reports that the former GFA boss
who arrived in Court from Kumasi seemed disappointed when he made his way back to Ejisu for
the ongoing by-election on April 30.
Argument
Baffour Gyau Bonsu Ashia, Counsel for Nyantakyi reminded the Court of what had transpired
previously.
“At the last adjourned date, my lady was very clear with her orders that, if by the 30th of April,
2024 the prosecution failed to present their first witness, my lady was going to strike out the suit
and discharge the accused persons,” he submitted.
According to him, “On that day, the prosecution was present in this court so there cannot be any
justifiable reasons for them not being present in this court.”
“My lady will also realize that the prosecution always come to this court in a team, so they
absenting themselves from this court today (Tuesday, April 30) is a clear indication that the State
is not interested in prosecuting this matter.
“It is our humble submission and prayer that my lady strikes out the matter and discharges the
accused persons,” Lawyer Ashia who was holding Thaddeus Sory’s brief told the Court.
Prosecution’s excuse
A State Attorney Adu Gyamfi said the substantive Attorney is indisposed and wants the case
adjourned.
By Court
Justice Marie-Louse Simmons after hearing the parties said, “The court has received two letters
signed by the substantive attorney for the State all dated 26th April 2024.”
According to her, in “both letters, the said counsel for the State requested for an adjournment
because she has been called up for an official assignment.”
“In one of the letters,” the Court said, “she requested for an adjournment to May 15, 2024, and
the other to 22 May 2024.”
Clarity
For the purposes of clarity, the Court said, “on the submissions made by counsel for the first
accused (Nyantakyi) at the last adjourn date, the proceedings ended with a statement by the court
‘if by April no meaningful steps have been taken in the appeal the two accused persons would be
discharged.’”
“Now, on November 29, 2023, this court in dismissing an application for Stay of Proceedings
filed by the prosecution ruled that the prosecution should call the other four witnesses whose
Witness Statements have been filed for the trial to start,” the Court said.
However, the Court said, “Up to date, nobody has been called.”
Pending appeals
The Court also recounted that, due to pending interlocutory appeals – one by the prosecution and
another by Kwasi Nyantakyi in May 2023 in relation to the mode of testimony of the Anas, the
court was reluctant not to discharge the accused.
The Court stated that “if no meaningful steps were taken toward the appeal the accused would be
discharged.”
“In addition, the prosecution was to call the other witnesses whose evidence would not be
affected by the outcome of the decision to be taken by the court.
“It was further emphasized that the minimal role of each witness whose witness statement has
been filed is to contribute to an element to be proven to the charges filed by the prosecution,” the
Court said.
Delay tactics
The Court also observed that, the prosecution in a bit to further waste the court’s time has
brought in these two letters “…claiming to have been called for an official assignment which
assignment is more important than the prosecution of a criminal trial at the High Court.”
She said, that none of the witnesses who had their Witness Statements filed has still not been
called.
“It is obvious that these are all tactics to waste the time of the court. The court will therefore
deem that the prosecution does not intend to call any other witness apart from the one whose
mode of testimony is to be determined by the Court of Appeal,” the Court said.
Logistical constraints
Justice Marie-Louise Simmons said, the Court, however, has been informed by the registrar of
the Court of Appeal of the state of the appeal pending.
“I have been informed that indeed the delay in the appeal has been due to some logistical
constraints….and also partly due to a mistake made by the prosecution in the title of the case
which necessitated…..in order to correct the misspelled name of A1 (Kwasi Nyantakyi) which
order was granted.
The Court said with the information from the registry on the compilation of the records for
appeal, “I will await the outcome of the appeal process filed by both sides.”
The case has been adjourned to June 10, 2024.
