Case against Akwasi Osei-Adjei, Daniel Gyimah suspended

The trial of former Foreign Affairs Minister, Akwasi Osei-Adjei, and the former Managing Director of the National Investment Bank, Daniel Charles Gyimah, was Friday suspended by the Accra Financial High Court.

It follows the court's decision to await the outcome of an interlocutory application for stay of proceedings pending their substantive appeal, which was filed on March 18, at the Court of Appeal.

The two, who are being tried for their role in the importation of rice from India, were on February 25 cleared of six charges of conspiracy, stealing, willfully causing financial loss to the state and using public office for profit.

However, the High Court ordered them to open their defence on two counts of conspiracy and contravention of the Public Procurement Act, since according to the court, "there are nagging questions that should be answered" on those charges.

Their acquittal and discharge on the six charges followed a submission of no case made by the two who argued that the prosecution at the close of its case, failed to establish a prima facie case against them.

Dissatisfied with the part of the High Court's ruling which ordered them to open their defence on the two other charges, the two on March 17, filed a notice of appeal at the High Court praying it to acquit and discharge them on the two other charges.

When the High Court presided over by Justice Bright Mensah resumed sitting on the case Friday after a month's adjournment, Godfred Dame, counsel for Mr. Osei-Adjei, drew the court's attention to the two applications filed at the Court of Appeal.

He told the court that the Registrar of the Court of Appeal was yet to fix a date for the application for stay of proceedings to be moved and, thus, prayed the court to adjourn the case sine die.

But an Assistant State Attorney, Paul A. Abarigah, urged the court not to suspend hearing since the Court of Appeal rules (C.I 19 Rule 28) prescribe that an application for stay of proceedings ought to be made at the trial court at first instance and can only be made at the Court of Appeal when it had been refused by the lower court.

His objection was overruled by the court after Mr. Dame argued that the rule as quoted by the prosecution had been amended.

The court, thus, fixed April 20, to await the result of the application for stay of proceedings.

In its ruling on the submission of no case, the court said Dr. Osei-Adjei had to explain the circumstances leading to the signing of the contract on the importation of the 15,000 metric tonnes of rice (300,000 bags) which it said, did not have the consent of the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning.

Mr. Gyimah, on the other hand did not seek the permission of the Board of the National Investment Bank before financing the importation of the rice, through the letters of credit, the court held.

But in their filed appeal, the two contend that the judge erred when he placed weight on irrelevant evidence by prosecution witnesses who testified in the case.

According to them, the judge disregarded the overwhelming evidence of all the prosecution witnesses that there was no use of public funds in the importation of the rice into the country.

Further, they claim the judge ignored the evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses to the effect that the National Investment Bank is not a procurement entity; hence, is not required to apply the Procurement Act.