Menu

Day 2 Of The Woyome Trial

Fri, 22 Jun 2012 Source: --

—Read The True Court Proceedings

The Republic

vrs

Alfred Agbesi Woyomei

Accused

Person: Present

Legal

Representation: Cynthia Lamptey with Mrs. Marina Opare for the republic.

Osafo Buabeng

with Musah Ahmed and Chris Koka led by Robertson Kpatsa for the accused person

PW1 REMINDED OF HIS OATH FOR FURTHER

CROSS-EXAMINATION

Q:Mrs. Ghanny, at the last adjourned date you told the Court that there

was a letter from the Attorney General instructing your Ministry to pay a settlement

amount to Mr. Woyome. You still stand by that?

A:Yes I do.

Q:Now this letter got to your Ministry before you travelled outside the

country.

A:Yes My Lord

Q:You also told the Court that there was a query raised at the Treasury.

Is that not so?

A:Yes.

Q:As a result of this query, the Minister of Finance wrote back to the

Attorney General for clarification. Is that not so?

A:Yes.

Q:Now the Minister of Finance in fact wrote this to the Attorney General.

I want you to identify this, that is a copy of the letter the Minister wrote;

Dr. Duffuor.

A:I believe it is.

Q:But it is coming from the Ministry of Finance.

A:Yes it is

Buabeng:My Lord we seek to tender this letter from the Ministry

of Finance.

Lamptey:No Objection My Lord

By Court: Exhibit “1”

Q:Mrs. Ghanny, this letter was written on the 12th of April, 2009. Is

that not so?

A:That is what it says.

Q:The Minister for Justice and Attorney General replied to this latter;

Exhibit “1” to the Ministry of Finance.

A:My Lord I wasn't part of the process, so I really cannot speak to that.

Q: But you are here

from the Ministry of Finance.

A:Yes I am.

Q:Are you aware that there was a response from the Attorney General.

A:I believe there was a response.

Q:Now Mrs. Ghanny, look at this, it is a copy of the letter from the

Ministry of Justice to the Ministry of Finance.

A:Yes My Lord.

Buabeng: My Lord I

want to tender it through her.

By Court: Exhibit “2”

Q:Now in Exhibit “1”, paragraph 6, the Honourable Minister requested the

Honourable Attorney General to provide him or his Ministry with further

documentation that substantiates the claim of the accused. Is that not so?

A:That is what the letter says.

Q: Now in response,

the Honourable Attorney General indicated in Exhibit “2” the basis for the

settlement of the claim by the accused person. She responded.

A:Yes she did.

Q:Now could you read paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of the letter slowly, take

your time and read it.

A:“Furthermore, you indicated that your Accounts Office require clarity

and evidence on the supporting documents with regard to whether the claim is

being made by the consortium that won the bid to conduct the financial

engineering led by Mr. Woyome, jointly or separately.

Furthermore to a

Ministry of Finance letter dated 4th May, 2005, Mr. Woyome made arrangements

for the grant of concessional loans for the rehabilitation of the Ohene Djan

and Baba Yara stadia and the construction of three others for the Ghana 2008

football tournament, the construction of six (6) hospitals and the Cobalt 60

Irradiation Plant, among others.

Mr. Woyome's role

in project financial engineering is further evidence by the letter from the

Ministry of Education and Sports dated 5th July, 2005 and an earlier letter

from the then Minister for Environment and Science, Prof. Kasim Kasanga dated

28th October, 2004. In addition, Mr. Woyome together with Waterville set up

offices in Vienna, Austria and Washington D.C., Italy and Switzerland as part

of the project financial engineering work for the projects in Ghana (copies of

letters attached). It can be seen from the available documentation that Mr.

Woyome, as Alternate Director of M-Powapak at the time, acted as the principal

party in discussions with government officials to facilitate the financial

engineering of the projects”.

Q:So based on Exhibit “2” the Attorney General informed the Minister of

Finance that Mr. Woyome had conducted some financial engineering for which he

merited the claim. Is that not so?

A:Yes My Lord.

Q:In Exhibit “2” the Attorney General again wrote that the claim is for

project financial engineering fees. The second paragraph of page 2.

A:The Attorney General indicates that the claim is for project financial

engineering fees by Mr Woyome and Austro-Invest.

Q:You also said at the last adjourned date that there was a default

judgment.

A:Yes.

Q:In fact you got actively involved after the default judgment was

obtained by Mr. Woyome against the government.

A:Yes My Lord.

Q: The Attorney General wrote to your Ministry once again, after the

default judgment.

A: Yes, that is correct.

Q:In fact she recommended that you pay that amount. Is that true?

A:That is true.

Q:So is this a copy of the letter written by the Attorney General to

Ministry of Finance.

A:Yes it is.

Buabeng:My Lord we wish to tender this letter through her.

Lamptey:OBJECTION: My Lord the witness is in the witness box to

answer questions. This is a letter written by somebody else .My Lord she is not

the author of the letter. My Lord we are objecting to it.

By Court: Objection

overruled, the document should go in. At the end of the day the Court will see

the weight to attach to it. The Court will attach the necessary weight Exhibit

“3”

Q:After summarizing everything up, the Attorney General in the last

paragraph requested you to, when I say you I don't mean you personally but your

Ministry, to pay the accused person. Is that not so?

A:Yes My Lord.

Q: Could you read the last but one paragraph.

A:“It is still my position that we pay Mr. Woyome and Austro-Investment

the negotiated amount of GH¢41,811,480.59”

Q:She said, it is still her position that you pay.

A:Yes My Lord

Q:And that is why you paid.

A:Yes My Lord

Q:You did admit a few minutes ago that you were actively involved in this

matter after the default judgment.

A:Yes.

Q:You would agree with me that you saw the default judgment.

A:Yes, I believe a copy was attached to the letter.

Q:Look at this copy and see if it is a copy of the default judgment that

you received.

A:I actually don't remember seeing this, what I saw was something like a

calculation.

Q:You are talking about the entry of judgment

A:Yes I saw the entry of judgment, I didn't see this one.

By Court: What is this document?

Buabeng: This is the certified true copy of the default

judgment. My Lord since she said she has not seen it, I will not tender.

Q:Is there anybody at the Ministry of Finance called Effie Simpson Ekuban

(Mrs.)

A:She was the then acting Chief Director.

Q:She was at post as at that time.

A:Yes, she was the acting Chief Director.

Q:She wrote to the lawyers of Mr. Woyome; that is the accused.

A:I wouldn't know, I would have to see.

Q:Look at this letter.

A:She did sign the letter, yes.

Buabeng:My Lord we seek to tender this letter through the

witness.

Lamptey:My Lord we object to this one too. My Lord one Mrs.

Effie Simpson has signed the letter, this signature wasn't identified. She is

not the author of the letter.

Buabeng:She has signed.

Lamptey:But anybody at all can sign anybody signature. My Lord

there is a signature purporting to be that of Effie Simpson Ekuban (Mrs.), the

witness has not identified the signature whether it is that of Effie. My Lord

how genuine can this be, it is a photocopy too My Lord. No foundation had been

laid.

Buabeng:This is the original.

Lamptey: Well you

didn't tell.

Buabeng:Do you want to see the original.

By Court:Why not, because that is what the Evidence Act says, so

that we compare both the original and the photocopy.

Lamptey: Well, for now that is it.

By Court:So do you withdraw your objection after seeing the

original?

Lamptey:No, I will not withdraw My Lord

By Court:If the PW1 knows the signature because she worked with

her the Court will admit in evidence.

Lamptey:My Lord she wasn't asked that question.

Buabeng:She said it.

By Court:Mr. Osafo Buabeng, learned counsel for prosecution said

you haven't laid proper foundation for that document to be tendered.

Buabeng:My Lord the signature was identified.

By Court:It is so easy for you to repeat the question.

Buabeng:Very well

Q:Look at this document and see whether you can identify the signature of

Mrs. Ekuban.

A:Yes

Buabeng:My Lord she has identified the signature. My Lord we

will take back the original and tender the photocopy after the prosecution has

compared.

Lamptey:My Lord where is the author herself, My Lord they wanted

to say that the author herself is not available. She came here to speak about

what she saw and did about the whole issue. They haven't told the court that

the author herself is not available. Otherwise she will find herself here and

they will be pushing everything from Finance through her. Those that they want

to bring here to make their case for them can be brought. She is here to talk

about what she saw and did about the whole issue My Lord. If they tell us that

Mrs. Ekuban, God forbid, is no more alive, then may be it can be done, but they

haven't said so. So she should come and tender and answer questions they want

to ask on this particular document My Lord.

By Court:Where is your witness coming from?

Lamptey:From Ministry of Finance My Lord.

By Court:And when you led her in evidence what did she say.

Lamptey:That she is at the Legal Department.

By Court:What do you want to do with the document?

Buabeng:My Lord we would like to tender the document.

By Court:I will allow it. Exhibit “4”

By Court:The PW1 is coming from the Ministry of Finance and

identified the signature of Mrs. Effie Ekuban as the signature of the said Mrs.

Ekuban. The original letter was compared with the duplicate and found to be in

order. Objection overruled.

Q: You were involved with the

negotiations between the accused, his lawyer and your Ministry at the Budget

Division of Ministry of Finance. After that meeting you wrote to the accused

through his lawyer, correcting the figures that was due to be paid the accused,

at the first installment.

A: I believe so, a letter had

come from the accused lawyer in which some of the figures were misrepresented,

misquoted. So I did write to correct the figures.

Q: See if this is the letter

that you signed, Mangowa Ghanny, it is original and duplicate.

A: Yes My Lord

Q: My Lord we are tendering it

through the witness.

By Court: Exhibit

“5”

Lamptey: My Lord can

I make a point, I believe this letter is dated 18th May, 2011, and that this

letter may have been written after the civil action was instituted. And it also

makes a reference to a claim for cost which the Ministry was rejecting. The

cost in the default action was incorporated in the 51 Million Ghana Cedis.

Q: You remember that you wrote

to the accused through his lawyer correcting the amount of cost.

A: Yes I did

Q: Now look at this and see if

that is the letter you wrote correcting the amount of cost.

A: Yes My Lord.

Q: My Lord we seek to tender

this letter through the witness.

By Court: Exhibit

“6”

Q: You also prepared a memo to

the Minister of Finance on this issue at a point in time.

A: I probably did, because we

do not unilaterally write letters without doing a memo to our bosses to inform

them about what is going on.

Q: And in that memo you

recommended payment to the accused.

A: I would want to see.

Q: I will also want to see

that memo.

A: I don't remember………….

Q: The memo should be on file

in your Ministry.

A: If indeed there is a memo, yes,

it will be on file.

Q: I believe the Ministry of

Finance you have a file or files on this case.

A: Yes.

Q: And you said the memo will

be in that file.

A: I didn't say that, I said

if indeed there was.

Q: Would you be able to

produce the file or files, including the memo at the next adjourned date.

A: I don't know what memo you

are talking about. At this point in time, the payment is already in process, so

I am not sure about what you mean by I recommended payment, payment of what. I

don't know what you are talking about.

Q: The entire file.

A: I am sorry, I am not sure I

can produce the entire file.

Q: But you told the court a

few seconds ago that there is a file on this case in the ministries.

A: There has to be.

Q: In your evidence in chief,

you said the matter was referred to you; that is the Attorney General's letter.

You summarized, you read the memo.

A: Yes My Lord

Q: It is that memo that we are

looking for.

A: That memo was forwarded to

the Budget Division.

Q: A copy of that memo is on

file in the Ministry.

A: I believe so.

Buabeng: My Lord at

this juncture, we humbly apply that the witness be made to bring that memo and

file at the next adjourned date, so that we can continue the cross-examination

and conclude.

Witness: My Lord

since I am not the custodian of that file which defence counsel requested from

me, could defence counsel request it directly from the custodian of the file.

By Court: Madam, you

made mention of a memo which you prepared, which was forwarded to the Budget

Division. So I would ask you to trace it up and bring it at the next adjourned

date; the memo that you did the summarization.

Buabeng: My Lord the

questions that will follow are all based on the introduction of that memo. So

having cross-examined extensively, I will pause, I have not ended the

cross-examination, but I am pausing, and then on the next adjourned date

hopefully I will end with her.

By Court: Case

adjourned to 22nd June, 2012 for continuation of cross-examination by learned

counsel for accused.

(SGD.) JOHN AJET-NASAM

JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

Source: --