Ambulance case: Ato Forson didn’t authorise LCs – Accused lawyers to court 

The legal team for the Minority Leader, Dr Cassiel Ato Forson in the ambulance case has told the court he did not issue Letters of Credit or authorised same.

According to them, that particular charge is baseless and should be dismissed.

The lawyers in their legal submissions to the court, they argued that the prosecution has failed to adduce sufficient evidence to back this charge.

They have thus asked the court to acquit and discharge the accused.

“We submit that, to the extent that the evidence on record do not support but contradict these material allegations in the particulars of offences for Counts 1 and 5, the prosecution has failed to adduce sufficient evidence on key ingredients of the offences in Counts 1 and 5. Consequently, A1 must be acquitted and discharged.“

Contrary to the assertions in the particulars of offence of Counts 1 and 5 that AI ‘authorized’ or ‘caused’ irrevocable letters of credit to be established it is clear from the evidence on record that AI never ‘authorized’ or ‘caused irrevocable’ letters of credit to be established nor did AI act in any manner without due cause and authorization.

I feel sorry for persons in Anas' Number 12 exposé - Kweku Baako

“Exhibits A and B1, which bear the signature of AI were transmitted to the Bank of Ghana under the authority of and on behalf of the Minister of Finance as confirmed by Exhibit 5 for A1….That claim is patently false,” the lawyers argued in their detailed submissions to the court.

They also stated that the prosecution of Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson is abuse of prosecutorial powers by the state.

According to them, the state was acting like a Leviathan, who has no regard for the rights and liberties of its citizens.

“We maintain that, in a reasoned decision, a court has a duty to clearly set out the legal principles and the evidence upon the decision is based.

“In addition, an adversarial system like ours, where the role of the court is primarily that of an umpire, places an additional duty on the Court to explain why it prefers one piece of evidence or argument to the other after carefully weighing the evidence relied on by the prosecution and the defence,” excerpts of their legal submission added.

Nat'l Cathedral subjects itself to statutory audit by Deloitte


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here