By Joyce Danso
Accra, Jan. 24, GNA- Former Ghana Cocoa Board Chief Executive Officer’s application to prohibit the trial judge from handling his case has been thrown out by the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
The five-member panel with Mr Justice Gabriel Pwamang, presiding, held that Dr Stephen K Opuni’s lawyer had not been able to convince the court that the trial Judge Justice Aboagye Tandoh exhibited any bias.
The apex Court therefore dismissed the application, invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the court to prohibit the trial judge on the basis of bias.
The former CEO of Cocobod, Seidu Agongo and the Managing Director of Agricult Ghana Limited, fertilizer manufacturing company, are being held for their alleged involvement in causing financial loss to the state in the purchase of fertilizers and alleged procurement breaches.
They have denied the various charges.
The Supreme Court said “We have read the processes filed and listened to the lawyers. We are not convinced that the trial judge exhibited any boas. Application for prohibition is dismissed.”
In his submission before the Supreme Court, Mr Samuel Cudjoe, counsel for Dr Opuni, argued that the trial judge declined to make further orders for the court proceedings to be made available to him.
Counsel for Dr Opuni held the judge only waived a document in court and they did not know the content of the documents.
He said there had been consistent acts of bias that showed that the trial judge would not be fair to them adding, “the trial judge had already taken position.”
According to him, what made him suspicious was when the trial judge said he was not going to make further orders in respect of the proceedings.
He said when they obtained the over 3,000 pages of proceedings, “It had a lot of errors.”
Chief State Attorney, Mrs. Evelyn Keelson, who was led by Godfred Yeboah Dame, the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, opposed the application before the court.
Mrs. Keelson held that Dr. Opuni’s lawyer had not raised credible issues of bias.
According to the Chief State Attorney, counsel had only raised allegations and complaints.
She said the trial gave orders to parties in the case to apply for proceedings.
Mrs Keelson contended that Dr. Opuni’s lawyer did not have the proceedings because he did not apply for it.
She was surprised that Dr. Opuni’s lawyer complained about errors in the court ‘s record of proceedings.
The Chief State Attorney held that they corrected mistakes in the proceedings because the same were displayed on the court’s various screens and proceedings were always available.
“The applicant has failed to invoke the Supreme Court’s inherent jurisdiction, prohibiting the trial judge on allegation of bias.” Mrs Keelson said.
GNA