By Morkporkpor Anku
Accra, March 26, GNA – An Accra High Court has adjourned proceedings in the case involving Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori-Atta and seven others due to service delays.
A scheduled Case Management Conference (CMC) could not proceed due to challenges in serving two accused persons.
When the case was called on Thursday, the prosecution informed the court that although three additional witness statements had been filed to facilitate the CMC, the conference could not take place because the Ofori-Atta and Ernest Darko Akore had not been served.
The two accused are currently at large.
The prosecution said efforts to serve the accused persons in the United States were ongoing through Mutual Legal Assistance processes.
It disclosed that the United States Department of Justice had requested additional information to facilitate the process, which had since been supplied.
Counsel for the 7th and 8th accused persons, including Mr Kwame Gyan, Chief Executive Officer of Strategic Mobilisation Ghana Limited (SML), supported by other defence lawyers, raised concerns over the delay.
They argued that there was no clear timeline for completing the service and possible extradition processes involving the two accused persons abroad.
The defence said the remaining accused persons, A3 to A8, had consistently complied with court attendance and reporting requirements to the Office of the Special Prosecutor.
They submitted that the continued requirement for monthly appearances imposed an undue burden on their clients.
They therefore prayed the court to discharge the accused persons A3 to A8 to allow the prosecution to complete processes relating to Mr Ofori-Atta and Mr Darko.
Counsel for Mr Ammishaddai Owusu-Amoah, a former Commissioner-General of the Ghana Revenue Authority, also supported the application.
He referred to practice directions aimed at reducing the cost burden of criminal proceedings on accused persons and urged the court to either discharge them or extend the reporting intervals.
The prosecution opposed the application, maintaining that it was ready to proceed with the case and preferred an adjournment instead of a discharge.
In its ruling, the Court held that the delay in prosecution was not due to any lack of diligence on the part of the prosecution.
The Court acknowledged ongoing efforts to serve the two accused persons and said the decision on how to proceed against them rested with the prosecution.
It held that it was fair to allow time for the service processes to be completed.
Accordingly, the Court rejected the application to discharge the accused persons and adjourned the case.
The matter has been adjourned to April 23, 2026, for further proceedings.
GNA
26 March 2026
Edited by Samuel Osei-Frempong