Court to rule allegation of Abodakpi's counsel

Accra, Dec. 3, GNA - The Court of Appeal will on December 5 rule on a motion for leave filed by counsel for Daniel Kwasi Abodakpi, Mr Tony Lithur, who is accusing Mrs Justice Hennritta Abban, a judge of the Court of Appeal, of influencing the decision of the Fast Track High Court.

The three-member panel is made up of Mr Justice Kanyoke, presiding, Mr Justice Yaw Appau and Mr Justice Kusi Appiah.

Abodakpi, ex-Minister for Trade and Industry, was sentenced by the FTHC to a 10-year jail term after it found him guilty for misappropriating 400,000 dollars allotted to the Science and Technology Valley Park Farm under the Trade and Investment Project. In an accompanying affidavit in support of the motion for Leave to lead fresh evidence at the hearing of the appeal, Mr Lithur pointed out that the specific evidence introduced was that Mrs. Justice Abban called out Mr Justice S.T. Farkye, the presiding judge, who was then delivering judgement in the case against Abodakpi.

He said upon Mr Justice Farkye informing Mrs Justice Abban that he was going to impose a sentence of four years on Abodakpi, Mrs Justice Abban directed him to increase the sentence to 10 years. "Mr Justice Farkye did impose the sentence of 10 years with hard labour on the appellant," he added.

In an affidavit in opposition Ms Gertrude Aikins, the Acting Director for Public Prosecution (DPP), said the incident of the trial judge leaving the reading of the judgement in the middle and leaving the court room was not unusual as judges are human beings and suffer from all human frailties.

"Neither the applicant nor the lawyer was in the room with the two justices to over hear what transpired between them." "Even though Mrs Justice Abban waited for Mr Justice Farkye outside the court room, to the best of my information, knowledge and belief, she did not have any discussion with him on the case but only delivered the criminal and procedures codes which he had requested from her." Ms Aikins said the trial judge was gone for only over one minute and the time spent was not long enough to hold any meaningful discussion.

The Acting DPP said no foundation had been laid to invoke the court's jurisdiction to introduce fresh evidence. "It is unclear under what order or authority the applicant is bringing the application."

According to her the application was without merit, misconceived and calculated to embarrass the two Justices of Appeal. Ms Aikins said a look at the judgement in its entirety showed that it flowed naturally and was the product of a learned trial judge. Mr Justice Farkye, an interested party in the suit, said he went out to meet Mrs Justice Abban to collect copies of Act 29 and Act 30 which he had earlier requested from her to enable him to refer while delivering judgement.

He said he spent less than two minutes with Justice Mrs Abban and that it was patently untrue that he went out to have discussions with her on the judgement.

He said: "I wish to say that my judgement in the trial of the applicant, which was written, was not in any way influenced by the collection of the said Acts from my said sister as can be attested to by the flow of the language of the said judgement when I read it in open court. "Consequently, the accusation that there was a real likelihood of bias on my part, which had occasioned a miscarriage of justice to the applicant, was not true." Mr William Addo represented Mr Justice Farkye while Mr Frank Davis represented Mrs Justice Abban.