The Court of Appeal has suspended proceedings against former National Food Buffer Stock Company (NAFCO) Chief Executive Officer, Hanan Abdul Wahab, pending the determination of his appeal challenging the adequacy of charges filed against him.
The ruling puts on hold the trial, which was scheduled to begin on Tuesday, October 20, after the court granted an application by the accused person’s lawyers for a stay of proceedings at the High Court.
The application was moved by a legal team led by former Attorney-General Godfred Yeboah Dame and Richard Gyambiby, while Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem-Sai opposed the request on behalf of the Republic.
In arguing for the stay, Mr Dame maintained that the appeal raised fundamental questions about the accused person’s right to a fair trial, particularly whether the charges sufficiently disclosed the alleged offences.
He argued that allowing the trial to proceed before the appeal was determined could result in substantial injustice to his client.
The defence challenged the particulars of several charges, including counts 3, 13 and 18, which relate to stealing, and counts 1 and 14, involving allegations of defrauding by false pretences.
On count 3, the lawyers questioned the prosecution’s decision to group multiple transactions into a single charge, alleging that Hanan stole approximately GH¢50 million through payments made between 2017 and 2025.
Mr Dame argued that the charge covered an extended period without providing sufficient details of the individual transactions to enable his client to understand and adequately respond to the allegations.
He further pointed out that although the prosecution’s summary of facts referred to 86 transactions, the charge sheet did not contain the corresponding particulars.
The former Attorney-General also contended that the prosecution had failed to identify the specific false representation allegedly made in support of the charges of defrauding by false pretences.
He urged the appellate court to grant the application, arguing that the record of appeal was ready and that suspending the trial would not unfairly prejudice the Republic.
Republic Opposes Suspension
Opposing the application, Dr Srem-Sai argued that the defence had failed to demonstrate the exceptional circumstances necessary to justify a stay of proceedings.
He maintained that the law permitted similar offences committed repeatedly over a period to be consolidated into a single count where the applicable legal requirements were satisfied.
The Deputy Attorney-General also argued that dissatisfaction with a trial judge’s decision did not, by itself, constitute sufficient grounds to halt proceedings.
He submitted that if the appeal succeeded, the relevant proceedings could be quashed, but a stay could unnecessarily delay the trial if the appeal failed.
In response, Mr Dame insisted that the charge sheet had to be examined on its own terms, adding that the right to a fair trial included the right to challenge charges that did not adequately disclose the alleged offences.
Court Cites Importance of Charge Sheet
In its ruling, the three-member panel, presided over by Justice Noble Nkrumah, with Justices Lydia Osei Marfo and George Boadi as members, emphasised the central role of the charge sheet in criminal proceedings.
The court described the charge sheet as the structure upon which a trial is built and held that the issues raised by the defence warranted judicial consideration before the trial could proceed.
It found that the concerns raised constituted exceptional circumstances justifying a stay of proceedings and consequently granted the application pending the determination of the appeal.
The appeal stems from a July ruling by Justice Francis Achibonga, who ordered amendments to two charges relating to defrauding by false pretences but dismissed the defence’s broader application seeking to have the charges struck out.
The Court of Appeal’s decision means the High Court trial will remain on hold until the appeal challenging the trial court’s decision on the charges is determined.
