The High Court in Accra has granted former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta a two-week extension to file his application to appeal an arrest warrant issued against him by the Circuit Court.
The court, presided over by Justice Ruby Aryeetey, granted the order despite opposition from the Office of the Special Prosecutor.
The court’s decision allows Ken Ofori-Atta’s lawyers to file their processes within the specified timeframe.
On February 12, this year, the OSP secured an exparte Arrest Warrant against the former finance minister but the time frame granted to appeal had elapsed leading to them filing a motion for extension of time.
Ofori-Atta’ submissions
On Tuesday, August 26, Ken Ofori-Atta’s lawyer, led by Frank Asamoah, argued that the application for an extension of time to file an appeal is necessary due to the circumstances surrounding the delay.
Asamoah cited Section 4 clause 2 of the Court’s Act, 2002 Act 620, and Section 117 (1) of the Court’s Act, which defines a judgment to include a decree, order, or decision.
He emphasized that the arrest warrant issued by the Circuit Court is an order that can be appealed, as per Section 326 of Act 30.
Counsel again contended that the OSP’s opposition to the application is unfounded and that the right of appeal and judicial review in the nature of Certiorari are not mutually exclusive.
He referred to the case of Republic v Circuit Court B, Accra, Ex-parte Madam Rebecca Komeley Adams, to support his argument.
Counsel also argued that the OSP’s contention that the application is an abuse of the court’s process is misplaced, as the applicant has provided reasonable explanations for the delay in filing the appeal.
Counsel emphasized that the issuance of the arrest warrant was done in the exercise of the court’s criminal jurisdiction and that the appeal would be a civil matter.
He prayed that the court grant the application in the interest of justice, allowing Ken Ofori-Atta to pursue his right of appeal regarding the exercise of his fundamental human rights.
Counsel further argued that the court should consider the merits of the appeal when leave is granted, rather than at this stage. He cited the case of GCB Limited v Chris Trading Store to support his argument.
Lawyer Asamoah concluded by stating that the application is properly before the court, and the OSP’s objections are unfounded.
OSP’s opposition
Maureen Emefa Bansah, representing the OSP, vehemently opposed the application, describing it as a textbook case of abuse of the court’s process.
She argued that the application seeks to revisit and relitigate matters previously determined in an earlier certiorari application, which is not permissible in law.
Ms. Bansah cited the case of NAOS Holdings v Ghana Commercial Bank, where the Supreme Court held that it is an abuse of process to give a litigant an open-ended opportunity to litigate and relitigate over the same issue.
She emphasized that the application is riddled with factual inaccuracies and that the alleged search did not include any inquiry regarding a statement on oath as required by Section 61 (4) of the Criminal and Other Offences Procedure Act, Act 30.
Counsel argued that the applicant is referring to the OSP in the wrong capacity as the Republic and that the appropriate person to bring an action against is the Special Prosecutor.
She concluded that the application is unsupported by any cogent or compelling reason for the extension of time sought and should be dismissed in its entirety.
The OSP further emphasized that the arrest warrant was secured ex-parte on oath and should not be construed as a live criminal action in the court of law.
She prayed that the court dismiss the application, citing the OSP’s affidavit in opposition.
MS. Bansah reiterated that the application is an afterthought to frustrate the judicial process and that the court should not grant the extension of time.
She concluded by stating that the OSP’s opposition is grounded in law and fact, and the court should uphold the OSP’s position.
