The trial of former Director-General (D-G) of Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT), Ernest Thompson and four others accused of causing financial loss to the Trust, has taken another twist. The accused persons have indicated their opposition to a ruling by the trial Judge and served notice that they will proceed to file a stay of proceedings at the Court of Appeal. This follows the refusal of the trial judge Justice J.Y.A. Kwofie an Appeal Court Judge, sitting as a High Court Judge to admit a stay of proceedings filed by the first three accused persons. The three accused persons were praying the Judge to let the Prosecution provide them with better and further particulars of the charges preferred against them pursuant to Article 19 of the 1992 constitution. Article 19 of the 1992 Constitution, states inter alia that an accused person must be informed in “detail” of the charges preferred against him or her. RULING OF COURT The application was before his own court but the judge declined and ruled that Prosecution continues. ARGUMENT OF DEFENCE COUNSEL Counsel for the first three defendants, argued in turns that the trial Judge stays his proceedings because they had filed an appeal against his earlier ruling refusing their application to order the Prosecution to provide them further or more “details” on the various counts. Counsel for the 1st accused quoted a case from European Court on Human Rights on the proper interpretation of the constitution on what constitutes “details” of a count. He argued that it was obvious that in the previous case the Court of Appeal had wrongfully assumed the powers of interpreting the constitution, which is a right vested in the Supreme Court and hence the trial Judge should not rely on same especially when it was one of the main grounds of appeal. Counsel for 2nd and 3rd accused associated themselves with the arguments of Counsel for the 1st accused and gave examples of what constitutes special circumstances which warrants that the motion for stay of proceedings ought to be granted. ARGUMENTS OF PROSECUTION Prosecution argued against the grant of the order to stay proceedings on the grounds that the issues being raised had been decided upon in an earlier case already. It contended further that, accused were on bail and hence the continuation of the case will not affect them in anyway and they do not think the accused had shown any special circumstance to warrant a stay. There was a virtual drama when the Prosecution among others, argued that the stay of proceedings should not be granted because the fourth and fifth accused did not file a stay of proceedings so granting a stay would lead to some form of confusion, since it will be in favour of only the three accused persons. Counsel for fourth accused stood up to reply but the trial Judge indicated that he was going to write his ruling. This did not go down well with Counsel for 4th accused since he was of the view that even if he had not filed any process yet as Counsel representing an accused person and in line with human rights provisions, he should at least be heard and recorded.National Identification Authority’s planned biometric registration of all citizens of Ghana. The SSNIT OBS project involves the procurement of a lot of equipment like high tech -servers, storage facilities, high-tech scanners, printers, biometric registration machines camera, finger print scanners and kits and also implementation services, training, securitization and encryption of the data bases to avoid hacking and even signing of warranty and service level support agreements.