You are here: HomeNewsPolitics2021 01 17Article 1156577

Politics of Sunday, 17 January 2021

Source: GNA

Ofosu Ampofo, Kwaku Boahen trial adjourned to February 2

The Accra Commercial High Court One, has adjourned the trial of Samuel Ofosu-Ampofo, National Chairman of National DemocraticCongress (NDC), and Anthony Kwaku Boahen, Deputy National Communications Officer of the party, to February 2, 2021.

This follows a request by Ms Emeafa Hardcastle, who held brief for Mr Tony Lithur, the lead counsel for the NDC national chairman, Mr Ampofo, with the excuse that Mr Lithur was bereaved.

Mr Ampofo and Boahen are standing trial for conspiracy to cause harm,

and in addition, Mr Ampofo, is facing an assault charge (for inciting NDC communicators) against public officers, Chairman of the National Peace Council (NPC) and Chairman of the Electoral Commission (EC).

They have both denied the offences and have been granted a GH¢ 100,000.00 bail with a surety each.

Prosecution had earlier told the court presided by Justice Samuel K. Asiedu, a Court of Appeal Judge with additional responsibility as a High Court Judge, that accused had been captured in an audio recording of proceedings of a meeting on February 3, 2019, planning a road-map of criminal activities targeted at Chairman of the EC and Chairman of the NPC, among others.

The meeting took place after January 31, 2019, Ayawaso West-Wuogon by-election, which turned violent, following a clash between some National Security operatives suspected to vigilantes and supporters of the NDC.

The tape was played on some radio stations and according to prosecution, the Criminal Investigation Department of the Ghana Police Service intercepted it.

Prosecution said Mr Boahen had confirmed being at the said meeting, and also confessed on a radio station that the information on the tape was true.

Last year an Accra High Court has refused an application to halt proceedings in the trial of Mr Ampofo.

Mr Ampofo’s lawyers wanted the court to put the trial on hold to allow the Court of Appeal to conclude on a case put before it.

The lawyers wanted the Appeal’s Court to determine an appeal case filed to challenge the decision of the High Court to admit into evidence a witness statement they felt should not have been accepted because the witness denied the knowledge of the content of the said statement.

But the High Court judge, Justice Samuel Asiedu disagreed with the application, and the judge among other things insisted that if the application was granted, it will unnecessarily delay the ongoing trial.

Join our Newsletter