News

Godfred Dame disagrees with Sedina Tamakloe acquittal, urges Attorney-General to appeal

Published

on

Former Attorney-General Godfred Yeboah Dame has disagreed with the Court of Appeal’s decision to acquit former MASLOC Chief Executive Officer Sedina Tamakloe Attionu, insisting that the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Mr Dame made the remarks after the Court of Appeal unanimously overturned her conviction and 10-year prison sentence.

He maintained that the evidence presented by the prosecution during the trial was credible and sufficient to support the conviction.

According to him, Ms Tamakloe absconded after she had been confronted with evidence led by the prosecution.

Advertisement

Mr Dame questioned the basis for the acquittal and suggested that the current Attorney-General should explain what led to the Court of Appeal’s decision.

He wondered whether the appeal had been strongly opposed by the state.

When asked whether he would advise the Attorney-General to challenge the ruling, Mr Dame answered in the affirmative.

“Oh, definitely,” he stated.

Advertisement

The former Attorney-General spoke about the ongoing criminal case involving former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta.

He indicated that an application for stay of proceedings filed at the High Court had been dismissed, and that a fresh application had been filed at the Court of Appeal.

Mr Dame argued that the charge sheet in the case was defective and that the appellate court should determine the issue before the trial proceeds.

He further criticised the decision to hear the case during the legal vacation, describing it as an “unjustified haste” and saying such trials had not been conducted during vacation periods in the past.

Advertisement

Mr Dame said his legal team would formally protest the directive allowing the case to proceed during the vacation.

The Court of Appeal’s ruling in favour of Ms Tamakloe has become a major legal and political issue, with the Attorney-General’s Department already announcing plans to appeal the decision at the Supreme Court.

By: Jacob Aggrey

Advertisement

Trending

Exit mobile version