The criminal trial of former Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF) Chief Executive Officer Solomon Asamoah will continue before the High Court after the Supreme Court dismissed his attempt to stop the presiding judge from hearing the case.
The apex court rejected a judicial review application by Mr Asamoah, who sought to overturn Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay’s decision dismissing a submission of no case and to prohibit her from continuing with the trial.
The ruling leaves intact the High Court’s decision requiring Mr Asamoah and his co-accused, former GIIF Board Chair Prof. Ameyaw Akumfi, to open their defence in the case involving an alleged $2 million financial loss to the state linked to the proposed Sky Train project.
The two former officials are accused of authorising the disbursement of funds for the project without the requisite board approval and despite the absence of work to justify the expenditure.
Following the close of the prosecution’s case, the accused persons filed submissions of no case, arguing that the evidence presented was insufficient to require them to defend themselves against the charges.
Justice Kocuvie-Tay, however, dismissed the application and directed them to proceed with their defence.
Dissatisfied with the decision, Mr Asamoah turned to the Supreme Court, contending that the trial judge had exceeded her jurisdiction by making definitive pronouncements, including a finding that he was responsible for the alleged financial loss.
But a five-member panel of the Supreme Court, presided over by Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang, rejected his arguments.
The panel, which included Justices Asiedu Adibu, Hafisata Amaleboba, Sophia Bernasko-Essah and Anthony Forson Jnr., held that the concerns raised by Mr Asamoah did not provide sufficient grounds for the court to exercise its discretionary supervisory jurisdiction.
The dismissal means Justice Kocuvie-Tay remains in charge of the criminal proceedings, with the accused persons required to continue their defence before the High Court.
The Supreme Court’s decision does not determine the accused persons’ guilt or innocence in the substantive criminal case, which remains pending before the trial court.
Clarify the headline’s trial statusTighten the opening paragraphs
