Ruling on Assets of BOG officials on August 10

Accra, Aug 3, GNA- An Accra Regional Tribunal will rule on Thursday on an interim application by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) asking it to confirm the SFO's decision to freeze the assets and bank accounts of two former top officials of the Bank of Ghana (BOG).

The BOG dismissed the two officials for their alleged involvement in a 1.5 million-dollar scandal that hit the bank in May.

After the dismissal of Mr Sebastian Dick Kobla Nukpui Gavor, former Director of Budgets and Accounts Department, and Justice Archibald Nee Ofosu Larbie, former Deputy Head of the Banking Department, SFO on July seven froze their assets.

As a result, the trial tribunal, chaired by Mr Isaac Duose, on July 17, directed counsel for the accused persons to negotiate with SFO to defreeze some of their assets to enable them to make a living.

It is this order that has necessitated SFO to bring the interim application praying the tribunal to let the SFO's action stand.

After listening to the submissions by counsel on both sides, Mr Benjamin Okai Tetteh, chairman of the three-member tribunal, said looking at the serious nature of the issue, the tribunal needed time to rule on the matter and consequently gave a week's adjournment In his submission, Mr Charles Ofori, counsel for SFO, said t the alleged negligence of the two bankers has "caused financial loss to the State."

Mr Ofori submitted that while they are facing trial, SFO is obliged to safeguard the property of the State by freezing their assets and bank accounts until the matter is determined.

It was his contention that if this is not done, and the respondents are found guilty at the end of the trial, there is every likelihood that the State would not have access to their assets of theirs since by then they might have made use of all.

Counsel said the measure is not meant to "cripple or wipe out families" of the respondents, but to safeguard State property.

On his part, Mr Charles Hayibor, counsel for the respondents argued that for the SFO to come up with a different charge of "causing financial loss to the State, other than conspiracy and stealing, which is before the trial tribunal, the application "does not have the leg to stand on."

Mr Hayibor submitted that since the law does not clarify what assets of accused persons can be frozen, SFO should freeze assets of the respondents that were acquired after and not before the alleged offence was committed.

Counsel submitted that after freezing the assets of certain individuals, Act 466 that set up the SFO empowers its Director to seek confirmation from either a High Court or a Regional Tribunal as to the strict compliance of the order within seven days.

The office is also to notify the affected persons through writing, he said. Mr Hayibor said after waiting for 19 days, SFO put in the application on July 26 but has still not notified his clients.

Counsel contended that by so doing, the SFO's action explicitly violates the very law that set it up The applicant, he said, should have proper grounds on which to bring the application, and therefore described it as incompetent, and prayed the tribunal to dismiss it.