Woyome's contract was improperly terminated; Lawyers insist

There was drama in Court on Monday after lawyers for embattled businessman Alfred Woyome returned to court over his case with the state concerning some 51 million Ghana cedis judgment debt paid to him a few years ago.

Former Minister of Finance, Mr. Yaw Osafo-Marfo had, at his first testimony as a prosecution witness, told the court that the state had no contract with Mr. Woyome because an initial agreement with VAMED Engineering, a company which Woyome fronted for, had been abrogated due to improper procurement processes.

At his first hearing, Mr. Osafo-Marfo produced a letter in court which according to him was critical because it was written by Vamed Engineering, Mr Woyome's partners, in which they were reacting to a letter from the government terminating a tender process for the construction of stadia for the 2008 Africa Cup of Nations tournament.

Mr. Woyome secured 51 million cedis as judgment award for roles his M-Powapak firm played in the transaction.

He claimed the money was for financial engineering as well as damages for illegal termination of the contract, which his company and its partners won.

However, Mr. Osafo-Maafo testified that what was terminated was not a contract but a tendering process.

But Mr. Woyome’s lawyer, Osafo Buabeng sought to punch holes in that testimony in court on Friday morning, stating that Mr. Osafo-Marfo’s claim was not true.

According to him, the claim given by Osafo-Marfo that Shanghai construction offered a less expensive package for the construction of the stadia was not true.

He produced documents in court to indicate that Sports Ministry had secretly met Shanghai construction to start negotiations with them when the said Ministry had already agreed a deal with M-Powapak.

Mr. Buaben argued that the regular procurement procedure was side-stepped to favour Shanghai as they were not subjected to the normal procurement and tendering process.

They also adduced evidence suggesting that shanghai’s price quotation was lesser because the state elected to undertake some initial construction procedure such as site clearing and the provision of utilities for them.

The case has been adjourned to Wednesday 25 July. **