Former Chief Executive Officer of Ghana Cocoa Board, Dr Stephen Opuni
A stay of proceedings application filed at an Accra High Court by the former Chief Executive Officer of Ghana Cocoa Board, Dr Stephen Opuni, and two others was yesterday dismissed by the court.
The court argued that the applicants failed to state reason or grounds for which their motion should be granted.
Dr Opuni and businessman Seidu Agongo are standing trial for allegedly causing financial loss of GH₵271.3 million to the state, among other charges.
The court yesterday consolidated the applications for stay of proceedings filed by both accused persons before dismissing it. The two wanted the court to halt the trial, pending the final determination of their appeal at the Court of Appeal. They are challenging the dismissal of their submissions of no case application by the court at the Court of Appeal.
Dr Opuni, Seidu Agongo and Agricult Ghana Limited are standing trial for 27 charges of causing financial loss to the state, defrauding by false pretences, conspiracy to commit crime, abetment of crime, money laundering, corruption by a public officer and contravention of the PPA Act among others.
Together, they are accused of causing a financial loss of over GHC217 million to the state through the sale and purchase of the controversial Lithovit Liquid Fertilizer which prosecution says was never tested
The application
Moving the motion for stay of proceedings, Samuel Cudjoe, counsel for Dr Opuni, argued that the court’s earlier ruling dismissing their submission of no case was in error.
Chief State Attorney Evelyn Keelson, who led prosecution, opposed the application.
She argued that there is currently no law requiring the court to stay proceedings in this matter, and referred the court to Constitutional Instrument (C I 132) of the Court of Appeal’s new rules, which has effectively done away with C I 19.
She insisted that the applicants had not established any basis for the court to stay proceedings. “There are no exceptional or special circumstances. They have not raised any issues about your ruling, which says that the state has been able to make a prima facie case against them,” Ms Keelson told the court.
She prayed the court to dismiss the application, arguing that the appeal has no chance of succeeding but just an attempt to delay the proceedings.
The court held that under Rule One of CI 132, it is no longer permitted to stay proceedings, adding that there is, therefore, no rule of law that permits the applicants to apply for stay of proceedings because of an appeal.
A Supreme Court judge, Justice Clemence J. Honyenuga, sitting as an additional High Court judge, accordingly dismissed the applications and adjourned the trial to June 3, 2021.
About The Author
