[ad_1]
General News of Thursday, August 1, 2019
Source: dailyguidenetwork.com
2019-08-01
Dr. Stephen Kwabena Opuni, former CEO of COCOBOD
The judge presiding over the criminal trial of Mr. Stephen Kwabena Opuni, former director general of the Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD) and Seidu Agongo, managing director of Agricult Ghana Limited, today rejected the claim of the 39, Dr. Opuni's lawyer, Samuel Cudjoe, for a stay of proceedings.
The court stated that Mr. Cudjoe could not even provide one and the same good reason for which the application should be allowed.
He added that accepting the application would only cause "unnecessary delay" and make the case more difficult.
Mr Cudjoe applied for a stay of proceedings before the High Court, holding the case against Mr Opuni and Mr Agongo on the merits, after seeking an interlocutory injunction before the Court of Appeal, but the Court of Appeal had not yet ruled.
The issue that prompted the accused's lawyer to make these requests is a decision of the High Court of July 10, 2019, in which the judge dismissed Mr. Cudjoe's attempt to present in evidence a dated letter of November 20, 2014.
On that day, the latter told the court that the letter had been written and sent by COCOBOD to Agricult Ghana Limited and that in this letter, Lithovit was qualified as liquid fertilizer, but the court had concluded that he had failed to establish a sufficient foundation, an important procedure. reference for the submission of documents in evidence, his offer was therefore rejected.
Today, the court found that another failure by Mr. Cudjoe to meet another important procedural requirement, this time with respect to the application for stay of proceedings, meant that his claim could not be saved.
Instead, it was rejected and rejected.
Applying for a stay of proceedings, Mr. Opuni's lawyer asked the High Court judge presiding over the case to suspend the trial until the appeal court decided on the interlocutory injunction. .
In today's decision, Judge Clemence Honyenuga, a judge of the Court of Appeal, sitting as a judge in the High Court and presiding over the trial, cited a Supreme Court decision that held that approval of an application for a stay of proceedings was left to the discretion of the judge of the case and must be exercised judicially; not capricious or capricious.
He added that in order for an application for stay of proceedings to be granted, the applicant, who is in this case Dr. Opuni's lawyer, is required to prove the existence of special circumstances. or exceptional, such as the high probability of irreversible harm. to his client, if the case is not suspended, however, no evidence of such special or exceptional circumstances for which the application should be allowed has been provided; not one.
The judge stated that upon reading the motion and all the relevant documents, he felt that the suspension of the trial would only further delay and stifle the case for which the cross-examination of the third witness in the case was over. accusation lasted for endless months view.
"This tribunal was fair and did not prevent any of the defendants from arguing their case. I do not see any irreversible difficulty with this refusal. I will reject the request. "
This is the second time this year that the accused files these motions before the High Court, which ruled on the merits and in the Court of Appeals.
The first one happened in March. As in the present case, the defendants disputed the rejection of their attempt to produce a report written by a committee established by the Ghana Cocoa Research Institute (CRIG) to investigate a document missing.
They told the court at the time that the committee report was relevant to their case.
The High Court dismissed their claim and they lost the interlocutory appeal to the Court of Appeal.
The prosecution is satisfied that the accused will suffer the same result a second time.
Source link
