The Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Godfred Yeboah Dame, has appealed to the Supreme Court to overturn a recent Court of Appeal decision that acquitted Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson, the current Minority Leader and businessman Richard Jakpa.
The pair had been on trial at the High Court for causing financial loss to the state.
The acquittal followed an appeal by Forson and Jakpa’s legal team, which contested a High Court ruling that had denied their submission of no case. In a 2:1 decision, the Court of Appeal, led by Justice Alex Poku-Acheampong and including Justices Bright Mensah and Ackaah-Boafo, found in favour of the appellants.
Justice Ackaah-Boafo, delivering the majority opinion, concluded that the High Court’s decision requiring the appellants to present a defence was erroneous and, therefore, set aside.
The Court of Appeal’s ruling, dated July 30, 2024, effectively acquitted and discharged Forson and Jakpa.
The majority decision held that the High Court’s call for the appellants to open their defence was misplaced and that no case submission should have been upheld.
In response, the Attorney General filed an appeal with the Supreme Court on August 8, 2024.
The appeal seeks two primary remedies: reversing the Court of Appeal’s decision and ordering Forson and Jakpa to continue their defence at the High Court.
The grounds for appeal outlined by the Attorney General are as follows:
Misapplication of Legal Standards: The Attorney General argues that the Court of Appeal misapplied fundamental principles regarding the standard of proof necessary to determine whether a case should proceed against the accused.
Failure to Assess Prima Facie Case: The appeal contends that the Court of Appeal failed to properly consider whether the prosecution had established a prima facie case, focusing instead on potential defences rather than the prosecution’s evidence.
Prejudice Against Prosecution: The Attorney General asserts that the Court of Appeal’s consideration of possible defences, which the prosecution had addressed and discredited during cross-examination, was unfair to the trial.
Errors in Interpretation: The appeal challenges the Court of Appeal’s finding that letters of credit did not constitute payment under the contract, arguing that this was contrary to the evidence presented. It also criticizes the ruling for attributing financial loss to the Ministry of Health’s default rather than the accused’s actions.
The Attorney General’s appeal underscores concerns over the legal standards applied by the Court of Appeal.
It seeks to rectify what is perceived as fundamental errors and a miscarriage of justice in the case against Forson and Jakpa.
