Pieces of evidence don't support charges against my client - Counsel

Accra, Oct. 27, GNA - Mr David Lamptey, a Defence Counsel in the Ghana Rubber Estates Limited (GREL) divestiture case on Monday told an Accra Fast Track Court that the pieces of evidence against his client did not support the charges against her. Consequently, he prayed the court not to invite his client to open her defence, but to acquit her.
Mr Lamptey stressed this point when he continued his submission of "no case" against his client, Hanny Sherry Ayittey, Treasurer of the 31st December Women's Movement (DWM). Ayittey is being tried with three others for their alleged involvement in corruption in connection with the divestiture of GREL.
The three are Emmanuel Amuzu Agbodo, former Executive Secretary of the Divestiture Implementation Committee (DIC), Ralph Casely-Hayford, Businessman, and Sati Dorcas Ocran, Housewife. They are accused for using their various positions to influence the DIC Board to privatise GREL in favour of a French company known as Societe Industrielle Plantation Hevea (SIPH). All the accused persons have denied their individual charges, and the trial judge, Mr Justice J. C. Amonoo-Monney, Appeal Court Judge, with an additional responsibility on the matter as a High Court Judge, has granted each of them a self-recognisance bail.
Mr Lamptey submitted that in his evidence before the court on December 4, 2002, the Third Prosecution Witness, Dr Albert Owusu-Barnafo indicated that Ayittey instructed him to transfer an amount of 150,000 pounds into her foreign accounts in Austria. Mr Lamptey submitted that in further evidence, Dr Owusu-Barnafo said in court that he allegedly gave the money to Ayittey to influence the DIC Board to give the bid for GREL to SIPH. Counsel wondered why his client could instruct the Prosecution Witness to transfer the money into her personal account in Austria, and take that same amount to influence the DIC Board to give the bid for GREL to SIPH. It was Counsel's submission that since the evidence by the Prosecution Witness did not support the charge against his client, there was no need for the court to invite her to open her defence. Accordingly, Counsel prayed the Court to acquit and discharge his client.

Mr Lamptey also referred to another 250,000 dollars on the charge sheet, which as a member of the DIC Board, his client allegedly received from Dr Owusu-Barnafo as a gift, to influence the Board's divestiture programme. Counsel submitted that Prosecution Witness in his evidence told the court that the money was rather meant to support the projects of the DWM. On the issue of comparing the handwriting of his client, and those of Dr Owusu-Barnafo and Madam Georgina Okaitey, another Prosecution Witness, Counsel submitted that the evidence of the expert, Assistant Superintendent of Police Alhaji Bukari Yakubu, was of no consequence. Counsel stated that since it was on record that Madam Okaitey's statements were taken down for her, the handwriting expert could not have done any effective investigative job if he compared somebody's handwriting written for her with that of his client.

Mr Lamptey also mentioned 120,000 dollars and another 25 million cedis, which Dr Owusu-Barnafo allegedly gave to his client. Counsel submitted that while the 120,000 dollars was meant to assist DWM with their activities in rural communities and not as a personal gift, Madam Okaitey who accompanied Dr Owusu-Barnafo to Ayittey's house, but stood outside, in her evidence, could not prove whether Dr Owusu-Barnafo actually handed over the 25 million cedis to his client. "There is no proof that an amount of 25 million cedis was given to Ayittey," Counsel submitted. Further hearing of Counsel's submissions would be on Friday, October 31. Oct 27, 03