[ad_1]
Lawyers for Ernest Thompson, former Director General of the Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT)
The lawyers for Ernest Thompson, former general manager of the Trust for Social Security and National Insurance (SSNIT), who is judged to have caused a financial loss of more than $ 14.8 million to the 39, state, ask for any documents that they have requested from the prosecution. .
According to an order issued by the High Court of Accra on December 14, 2018, the prosecution issued about 95 of the 111 documents requested by the defense, but at the hearing yesterday, Thompson's lead counsel, Mr. Samuel Cudjoe, required the delivery of all documents. to help his client's defense.
Mr. Cudjoe's request provoked a "clash" between him and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Ms. Yvonne Atakora Obuobisa.
While Mr. Cudjoe insisted that the remaining documents were in the possession of the SSNIT and should be provided, the DPP maintained that the SSNIT had provided all the documents in his possession that had been requested by the defense.
accused
Thompson and four others – John Hagan Mensah, former IT Manager at SSNIT; Juliet Hbadana Kramer, CEO of Perfect Business Systems (PBS); Caleb Kwaku Afaglo, former Manager of Management Information Systems (SSG) at SSNIT, and Peter Hayibor, SSNIT's lawyer – are on trial for the SSNIT Operational Business Suite (OBS) project described by the prosecutor general. ) as dysfunctional software.
All of the defendants pleaded not guilty to 29 counts, including the deliberate loss of financial losses to the state, false pretense fraud, violation of the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Law 663) and conspiracy.
They are on bail.
Request for more documents
On October 22, 2018, Ms. Obuobisa released about 127 documents that the prosecution would use to present her arguments to the defense attorney.
The DPP's action was consistent with a landmark ruling by the Supreme Court on June 7, 2018, that pre-trial disclosure was an imperative in all criminal cases to enable defendants to defend themselves effectively.
Mr. Cudjoe responded that although the prosecution provided documents to the defense, some essential documents were not provided.
As a result, he filed an application, which was accepted by the court, asking the prosecution to disclose 111 additional documents.
Clash over documents
Yesterday, at the hearing, the DPP informed the court that the prosecution had complied with the court 's order and had "substantially" provided the defense with the documents that it had. she asked.
However, she explained that the SSNIT had indicated that some of the documents requested by the defense were not in its possession.
In his response, Mr. Cudjoe stated that it would be absurd to claim that some of the documents were not in his possession.
According to him, documents such as letters written by the current director general of SSNIT in 2017 about the OBS project and minutes of a meeting of the steering committee on the OBS project have not provided by the SSNIT.
"The documents are with SSNIT. It is crucial that the prosecution bring them, "he said.
Ms. Obuobisa replied that the SSNIT could not provide documents that were not in her possession.
"The SSNIT can not bring what it does not have," she said.
After the proceedings, the presiding judge, Judge Henry Kwofie, asked the two parties to meet and solve the problem.
The hearing continues on March 22, 2019.
The case of the prosecution
In June 2010, SSNIT launched a $ 34 million OBS project to reorganize its operations through information and communication technologies (ICT) to enable it to implement a modern system of communications. pension administration.
This is the case of A-G that between September 2013 and September 2016, the five accused engaged in various illegalities resulting in a financial loss to the state in connection with the said project.
The sum of the contract, said the AG, also climbed from $ 34 million to more than $ 66 million, even though the OBS system did not work effectively, as provided in the project contract .
on the OBS project were not provided by SSNIT.
"The documents are with SSNIT. It is crucial that the prosecution bring them, "he said.
Ms. Obuobisa replied that the SSNIT could not provide documents that were not in her possession.
"The SSNIT can not bring what it does not have," she said.
After the proceedings, the presiding judge, Judge Henry Kwofie, ordered the two parties to meet and solve the problem.
The hearing continues on March 22, 2019.
Email of the author: This email address is protected from spam. You must enable JavaScript to view it.
[ad_2]
Source link
