The third accused in the controversial ambulance procurement trial, Richard Jakpa, has questioned the integrity of the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Godfred Yeboah Dame.

Jakpa and the first accused in the case, Minority Leader Cassiel Ato Forson, were on Tuesday acquitted and discharged of the charges of causing financial loss to the State.

Jakpa, a former soldier who had pleaded not guilty, sees his victory as upholding the rule of law, and described the Minister of Justice as a person who employs foul means against those who do not align with his interests.

He made these remarks following the 2:1 majority decision quashing the ambulance trial.

Calling the Attorney General names and accusing him of not playing by the rules, Jakpa said putting Yeboah Dame up as the Attorney General means one “…can rest assured that innocent people will be jailed. You either join them to pillage and run the country down and capture the whole country or they send you to jail.”

Minority Leader, Dr Cassiel Ato Forson and Richard Jakpa, who is a representative for Big Sea, were accused of causing a financial loss of €2.37 million to the State in a deal to purchase 200 ambulances for the country between 2014 and 2016.

The Court said the two have no case to answer, and therefore set aside an earlier decision of the High Court for the case to proceed, for which Richard Jakpa, the 3rd accused, has had to call a number of witnesses.

During the interaction with the press, Mr Jakpa explained that “almost all our institutions have been captured, they have been cowered into silence.We only have a few men of integrity who are still in state institutions, who are still trying to hold the rule of law and protect this democracy of ours. If it was left to these people in government, there would be nothing left for Ghanaians.”

Meanwhile, the Attorney General has vowed to appeal against the Appeals Court’s decision.

Godfred Dame indicated that his office “considers the decision of the Court of Appeal to be perverse in the quest for public accountability and the rule of law.”

“The decision clearly is heavily against the weight of the cogent evidence led by the prosecution in substantiation of all the charges against the accused persons at the trial,” he concluded.

Source: Myjoyonline.com