By William Yaw Owusu
Wedneday May 23, 2007
AN Accra Fast Track High Court yesterday dismissed an application for a stay of execution pending an appeal filed by the Attorney-General’s Department to challenge the court’s decision for the release of the property of George Adu Bonsu, popularly called Benjilo.
The court, presided over by Justice Victor Ofoe, also awarded ¢5 million cost against the AG’s Department.
With this development, the plaintiffs who sued for the release of the property could go ahead to take possession.
Following Benjilo’s conviction by an Accra Tribunal in April 1997, for narcotic offences, property including houses, shops and cars believed to belong to him were seized by the state.
However, six interested parties, including boxing legend Azumah Nelson, who claimed ownership of the seized property, commenced a civil action against the Inspector-General of Police, the Narcotics Control Board and the Attorney-General and obtained a ruling on February 13, this year restoring the property to them.
The AG’s Department subsequently filed a motion for stay of execution pending appeal.
However, when the motion was to be moved on May 10, Mr William Kpobi, a Principal State Attorney, who represented the AG, told the court that there were inconsistencies in the trial on which the court based its decisions, and the AG would need an adjournment to point out those inconsistencies. the court granted the request.
In the affidavit deposed to by Marina Atuobi, State Attorney, the AG’s department said the tribunal erred in law by its refusal to grant forfeiture orders on the grounds that there was a civil case involving the same property pending at the Fast Track High Court.
It said the evidence adduced by the plaintiffs were not in law and on the facts. The affidavit indicated that the appeal was likely to succeed and having regard to the inconsistencies which came out during cross-examination by the defendants/applicants of the witness of the plaintiffs/ respondents, the court erred in giving judgement without giving the defendants a hearing.
It said: “Notwithstanding the defendant’s/applicant’s inability to open their defence, this court should not have been satisfied with the evidence adduced by the plaintiffs/respondents, which evidence was shown to be manifestly unreliable on cross-examination by the defendants/applicants.”
The affidavit said prior to the delivery of judgement, the defendants had filed an application for forfeiture before the Regional Tribunal against Benjilo, in respect of the property, the subject matter of the appeal.
Other parties to the civil suit are Benjilo Fabrics Company Limited, Mrs Grace Bonsu, Dennis Adu Bonsu, Raymond Kofi Adu Amankwah and Ms Yaa Konadu.
The trial court presided over by Justice Ofoe had ordered that over c1.1 billion be paid to the plaintiffs with interest from 1997 being the total value of goods seized at Benjilo Fabrics Co. Ltd. And c30 million for the rehabilitation of each of the two cars seized at the time of Benjilo’s conviction.
Additionally, the court awarded c80 million to the plantiffs as damages and c50 million cost against the defendants.
In an affidavit deposed to by Marina Atuobi, State Attorney, the AG’s department said the tribunal erred in law by its refusal to grant forfeiture orders on the grounds that there was a civil case involving the same property pending at the Fast Track High Court.
It said the evidence adduced by the plaintiffs were not in law and on the facts. The affidavit indicated that the appeal was likely to succeed and having regard to the inconsistencies which came out during cross-examination by the defendants/applicants of the witness of the plaintiffs/ respondents, the court erred in giving judgement without giving the defendants a hearing.
It said: “Notwithstanding the defendant’s/applicant’s inability to open their defence, this court should not have been satisfied with the evidence adduced by the plaintiffs/respondents, which evidence was shown to be manifestly unreliable on cross-examination by the defendants/applicants.”
The affidavit said prior to the delivery of judgement, the defendants had filed an application for forfeiture before the Regional Tribunal against Benjilo, in respect of the property, the subject matter of the appeal.
Other parties to the civil suit are Benjilo Fabrics Company Limited, Mrs Grace Bonsu, Dennis Adu Bonsu, Raymond Kofi Adu Amankwah and Ms Yaa Konadu.
The trial court presided over by Justice Ofoe had ordered that over c1.1 billion be paid to the plaintiffs with interest from 1997 being the total value of goods seized at Benjilo Fabrics Co. Ltd. And c30 million for the rehabilitation of each of the two cars seized at the time of Benjilo’s conviction.
Additionally, the court awarded c80 million to the plantiffs as damages and c50 million cost against the defendants.
Moving the motion yesterday, Mr Kpobi argued that part of the evidence given by Mrs Grace Bonsu, one of the plaintiffs, was discredited on oath saying, that “at one point she had said Benjilo had nothing to do with Benjilo Fabrics Company Limited and in another breadth, she said he had interest in the same company.”
Mr Kpobi further argued that when the trial judge in his judgement commented that the trial had given him anxious moments, it indicated a bias and the court should have declined jurisdiction.
He said the court should also have ascertained whether a prima facie case had been established against Benjilo.
But opposing the application, Yoni Kulendi, counsel for the plaintiffs, said once the rules were clear on issues of inconsistency, the applicant should be able to demonstrate to the court that the appeal had a likehood of success.
“The appeal against this court’s ruling is a dead one and is not likely to succeed,” he said.
Mr Kulendi said the application could not tell the court the special circumstances and the damage they would suffer in order to warrant a stay of execution.
“The court should be satisfied that this appeal raises a question of law and fact, but when they claim that the judge showed bias, then there is a genuine mischief on the part of the applicant, he stated.”
In its notice of appeal, the AG’s Department contended that judgEment was against the weight of evidence adduced during the trial and that the trial judge erred in awarding of the respondents/plaintiffs, special damages when they had not been specifically asked for.
In an affidavit deposed to by Marina Atuobi, State Attorney, the AG’s department said the tribunal erred in law by its refusal to grant forfeiture orders on the grounds that there was a civil case involving the same property pending at the Fast Track High Court.
It said the evidence adduced by the plaintiffs were not in law and on the facts.
Other parties to the civil suit are Benjilo Fabrics Company Limited, Mrs Grace Bonsu, Dennis Adu Bonsu, Raymond Kofi Adu Amankwah and Ms Yaa Konadu.
The trial court, presided over by Justice Ofoe, had ordered that over ¢1.1 billion be paid to the plaintiffs with interest from 1997 being the total value of goods seized at Benjilo Fabrics Co. Ltd and ¢30 million for the rehabilitation of each of the two cars seized at the time of Benjilo’s conviction.
Additionally, the court awarded ¢80 million to the plaintiffs as damages and ¢50 million cost against the state.
No comments:
Post a Comment