Mpiani, Tarzan trial: Former Deputy AG questions basis

Mr Osei Prempeh said lawyers of Messrs Wereko-Brobby and Mpiani must protest

A former Deputy Attorney General under the Kufuor administration, Kwame Osei Prempeh, is questioning the basis for the prosecution of former government officials Kojo Mpiani and Charles Wereko-Brobby over Ghana@50 expenditure.

The former Chief of Staff and the former CEO of the Ghana@50 Secretariat have both been charged with wilfully causing financial loss to the state.

A government white paper issued on Wednesday accepted recommendations that the former officials broke the law by exceeding the amount of money approved by Parliament for the celebration of Ghana's fiftieth anniversary.

But former Deputy Attorney General, Kwame Osei Prempeh, says he doubts the accuracy of the facts on which the charges filed are based.

The white paper indicated that as of 31st December 2008, a total sum of GH¢97.7 million had been spent on the celebration, far in excess of the GH¢29.3 million that was approved by Parliament for the celebration.

According to the document, the excess spending was in violation of Article 178 of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana and the Financial Administration Act, 2003.

According to him, the report by the commission of inquiry should have the powers of a High Court judgement six months after it has been made public and individuals who are subjects to such a report reserve the right to appeal against the recommendations of the report, three months after it has been made public.

“So that if you come out today with a white paper and the next morning you are sending the person to court, you are killing his right to appeal and that's exactly what this government is doing; infringing on the rights of Mr Kwadwo Mpiani and Charles Wereko-Brobby; denying them their right to appeal as given under the constitution,” he said.

Mr Osei Prempeh said the developments show the ruling government is being “stampeded into taking action against members of the previous government” by “foot soldiers” of the ruling party “who are hungering after the blood” of officials under the Kufuor administration.

However, a legal expert, Chris Ackumey said whilst a person implicated in any adverse findings can appeal at the Appeal Court, “the Constitution does not in any way debar the President from giving directives to the Attorney General to do any other thing in respect of the same matter.”

Mr Ackumey cited Article 285 of the constitution which states: A find of a Commission of Inquiry shall not have an effect of the judgement of a High Court as provided by clause 2 of this constitution unless six months has passed after a finding is made and announced to the public.”