Hearing of Abodakpi’s Appeal Fixed For Thurs

Dan Abodakpi

The hearing of an application for the amendment of the appeal filed by Dan Abodakpi, a former Minister of Trade and Industry, against his 10-year jail sentence for causing financial loss to the state has been fixed for Thursday, October 11, 2007.

The Court of Appeal is also expected to hear the appellant's bail application on the next adjourned date.

On August 7, 2007 the court had to adjourn sine die for the reconstitution of the panel following an accusation from counsel for Abodakpi, Mr Tony Lithur, alleging that the trial judge, Mr Justice S.T. Farkye, had risen from the courtroom on the day of judgement to hold discussions with a panel member on Abodakpi's case, Mrs Justice Henrietta Abban, thereby acting in a manner that gave rise to real likelihood of bias.

At the court's sitting in Accra yesterday, the presiding judge, Mr Justice B.T. Aryeetey, fixed the new date after it emerged that the appellant's motion on notice to amend his grounds of appeal had not been placed on the court's docket.

The other members of the panel were Mr Justice Marful Sau, who replaced Mrs Justice Abban, and Mrs Justice Mariama Owusu.

The new grounds of appeal, which centred mainly on the conduct of Mrs Justice Abban, stated, among other things, that “the conduct of Her Ladyship, Mrs Justice Abban, in calling out the trial judge out of the courtroom, knowing that he was in the middle of delivering a judgement, and holding discussions with the trial judge on the case in respect of which he was delivering the judgement, constituted an interference with the judicial process and an infringement of Article 127 (2) of the Constitution of Ghana, thereby rendering the trial a mis-trial”.

According to the additional grounds of appeal filed on behalf of the appellant by Mr Lithur, the conduct of Mr Justice Farkye and Mrs Justice Abban in relation to the trial and the delivery of the judgement denied the appellant's right to a fair trial and due process, thereby “occasioning a miscarriage of justice”.

The appellant further stated that the trial judge erred in disregarding the evidence of the defence without any reason.

“The trial judge erred in not providing reasons for relying on certain evidence of the prosecution when such evidence was contradicted by other evidence of the prosecution,” the appellant stated, adding that “the trial judge erred in refusing to give reasons for imposing the maximum custodial sentence on the appellant”.

In his motion on notice for bail pending the outcome of the substantive appeal, Abodakpi, who is also the National Democratic Congress (NDC) Member of Parliament for Keta, said he believed his appeal had a great chance of succeeding because the prosecution failed to establish a case against him.

He is, therefore, praying the Court of Appeal to grant him bail, since he will comply with the bail terms while the substantive appeal is heard.

In reply to the appellant's application, a Chief State Attorney, Ms Gertrude Aikins, said there was no grounds to justify the appellant's application, adding that “the trial judge studied the case for the defence and concluded that he did not believe their story. The judge gave a reasoned judgement”.

She also denied that there were material conflicts in the prosecution's case, explaining that there might have been some differences in narration but no conflict borne out by the defence.

Ms Aikins further pointed out that the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt on all the charges.

Story: Mabel Aku Baneseh