The legal landscape in Ghana is currently embroiled in a protracted dispute concerning the trial of Hanan Abdul-Hamid, former Attorney-General and Chief Executive Officer of the National Food Buffer Stock Company (NAFCO). Godfred Yeboah Dame, the former Attorney-General and lead counsel for the defunct NAFCO, has vehemently rejected any attempt to compel his client to continue the trial during the legal vacation period, citing a fundamental constitutional right and the potential for a dangerous precedent.
Mr. Dame’s stance stems from a recent directive issued by Justice Francis Apangabonu Achibonga, a Court of Appeal judge serving as an additional High Court judge. The directive, in conjunction with a recent communication from the Justice Relations Office, directs the couple to ensure that lawyers are present during the resumption of the case on August 17th. Failure to do so, according to Mr. Dame, could result in the witness, fourth prosecution witness, being personally required to continue the cross-examination.
This situation follows a previous court order by the Justice Court, instructing the couple to ensure that their lawyers are present. The court also warned that failure to conduct the cross-examination themselves could lead to the witness’s discharge from the case. Mr Dame emphasized that he does not anticipate a similar scenario occurring in his client’s case, attributing this to the Court of Appeal’s scheduled focus on a motion to halt proceedings pending a determination of a motion before the Court of Appeal.
He stated, “I have my doubts that that will happen because next week, what is for consideration is whether the stipulations we have filed at the Court of Appeal should hold the hands of the court.” Mr Dame maintains that his client will not participate in any proceedings during the vacation period.
Furthermore, the former Attorney-General has repeatedly challenged the court’s decision to proceed with the trial during the vacation, arguing that criminal proceedings should only be conducted during exceptional circumstances. He has also questioned the urgency of the case, asserting that there is no emergency justifying the trial during the vacation.
Mr. Dame’s opposition is rooted in his firm belief that an accused person possesses a constitutional right to legal representation and that this right cannot be unilaterally taken away by a court order. He added, “We’ll see the kind of dangerous precedent that would set in this country. A party has a right to legal representation, to counsel of his choice, and that right is constitutional. It cannot be taken away from a person just by the stroke of the pen of any person.” The issue has sparked considerable debate within the legal community and among political observers, particularly considering the recent re-election of President Akufo-Addo and his NPP leadership, with some observers noting the continued support for Mr. Dame.
The court’s decision to continue the trial during the vacation is a significant development, raising concerns about potential challenges to the legal process and the interpretation of constitutional rights in Ghana. The legal implications of this situation are expected to be closely scrutinized by legal experts and observers across the country.
Watch Related Video
Source: Adom Online
