Visits of prosecution witnesses to my client were social- Counsel

Accra, Nov 5, GNA- Mr Rodney Heward-Mills, defence counsel in the Ghana Rubber Estates Limited (GREL) divestiture case, said on Wednesday that visits by two of the prosecution witnesses to his client's office were only social.

Continuing with his submission of "no case" against his client who is among four persons being tried by an Accra Fast Track Court, for their alleged involvement in corruption in the privatisation of GREL, Mr Heward-Mills stated that money did not change hands between his client and the visitors.


Ralph Casely-Hayford, a businessman and three others namely, Hanny Sherry Ayittey, treasurer of the 31st December Women's Movement (DWM), Emmanuel Amuzu Agbodo, former executive secretary of the Divestiture Implementation Committee (DIC) and Sati Dorcas Ocran, housewife, are standing trial for using their various positions to influence the decisions of the DIC board in the course of the divestiture.


At the end of the exercise, the court was told GREL fell into the hands of a French company called Societe Industrielle Plantation Hevea (SIPH).


The accused persons have all denied the charges, and the trial judge, Mr Justice J C Amonoo-Monney, Appeal Court Judge with an additional responsibility on the case as a High Court Judge, had granted each of them a self-recognisance bail.


Mr Heward-Mills told the court that there was no documentary evidence to prove that his client allegedly took an amount of 70 million cedis on September 25, 1996.

Counsel said during their visits to his client's office, the two prosecution witnesses, Dr Albert Owusu-Barnafo, SIPH consultant, and Madam Georgina Okaiteye, member of the 31st DWM never handed over to him any money.


The two, counsel said, could not give any documentary evidence to implicate his client as having received the money to influence Mr Dan Abodakpi, a sitting Member of Parliament, and former member of the DIC board.


Mr Heward-MiIls submitted that in her evidence, Madam Okaiteye who said she had known Casely-Hayford for so many years, was silent on the participation of any transaction between the accused person and Dr Owusu-Barnafo who allegedly handed over the money in her presence. Counsel further submitted that if any transaction took place at all he did not see the reason why the prosecution did not charge the two witnesses as accomplices.


"Since the two are not independent witnesses, their evidence has to be treated with a great deal of circumspection because they cannot be furnishing the court with any reliable evidence," counsel submitted. Mr Heward-Mills continues with his submission of "no case" on