The Attorney General and Minister of Justice of the Republic of Ghana, Hon. Dr. Dominic Akuritinga Ayine, has strongly defended his decision to withdraw charges against several individuals in high-profile criminal cases, citing ethical, professional, and legal reasons.
Addressing the media, Dr. Ayine emphasized that he exercised his prosecutorial discretion responsibly and in full compliance with constitutional principles.
Dr. Ayine disclosed that before making these decisions, he undertook extensive consultations, including multiple briefings from the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), discussions with defense lawyers, engagements with investigators, and consultations with at least one of the receivers involved in the banking sector cases.
“One, I had several briefings from the director of public prosecutions that is the DPP on each of the cases. Where I disagreed with her, I made my disagreement known to her with reasons. Two, I spoke to the defence lawyers in each of the cases. And again, where there were disagreements, as for instance, in the banking cleanup cases, which I shall deal with shortly, I made my views known to the lawyers.
“Three, I spoke to some of the investigators involved in the cases at hand to get a sense of what they found during the investigation of the cases. And finally, I met with and discussed the banking sector cases with at least one of the receivers involved in those cases. I have scheduled a meeting with the second receiver which is yet to take place”.
Hon. Dr Dominic Akuritinga Ayine, Attorney General and Minister of Justice
He refuted the long-standing view that an Attorney General owes no explanation for entering a nolle prosequi, asserting that such a stance contradicts the spirit of Ghana’s Constitution.
Quoting Justice Kwaman JSC’s opinion in the Gregory Afoko v. Attorney General case, Dr. Ayine underscored the importance of transparency in prosecutorial decisions, stating: “The decisions to prosecute and to terminate the prosecution of suspected offenders is a matter of immense public interest.”
He further argued that Article 296 of the Constitution imposes an obligation on the Attorney General to be candid in exercising discretionary power.
Three Key Factors Behind Case Discontinuations
Dr. Ayine outlined three main factors that guided his decision to terminate certain prosecutions: ethical and professional considerations, defective charges and insufficient evidence.
On the first reason, Dr Ayine strongly opined that he could not, in good conscience, continue prosecuting cases where he had prior involvement as defense counsel. This applied particularly to Republic v. Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson & Another and Republic v. Ofosu Ampofo & Another.
“In the case of Republic versus Ato Forson, I was not counsel on record, but my junior partner, Godwin Edudzi Tamakloe, was a council on record. As a team, we discussed our strategy in chambers, and I was involved in reviewing legal arguments, and in some instances, altering some of the arguments that we filed in court.
“I believed then and still believe now that the Honorable Ato Forson was a victim of a political witch hunt and that he had no case to answer in that trial. That position was vindicated by the erudite judgment of the court of appeal, which ruled that the trial court aired in calling upon the accused persons to mount their defense.”
Hon. Dr Dominic Akuritinga Ayine, Attorney General and Minister of Justice
When the then attorney general, the Honourable Godfred Yeboah Dame, vowed to file an appeal and actually went ahead to do so, Dr Ayine said he viewed the move as done to save face and that there was no scintilla of merit to his appeal. “Indeed, the appeal was, to say the least grossly incompetent“, he remarked.
On his view on defective charges, he pointed out that his review of some cases revealed that charges were legally defective or lacked common-sense justification.
With his insufficient evidence claim, Dr Ayine justified that in some cases, the evidence presented created reasonable doubt regarding the guilt of the accused, making continued prosecution unjustifiable.
Dr. Ayine confirmed that his decisions led to the discontinuation of several high-profile cases: Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson & Richard Jakpa (Ambulance Procurement Case): The case, initially pursued by former Attorney General Godfred Yeboah Dame, was deemed politically motivated and legally unsound.
Dr. Stephen Kwabena Opuni & Seidu Agongo (COCOBOD Case): The trial involving alleged financial loss of GH¢271 million in the Lithovit fertilizer scandal was terminated.
Dr. Ernest Thompson & Three Others (SSNIT Case): The charges of financial mismanagement were dropped, though some individuals remain on trial.
Collins Dauda & Four Others (Saglemi Housing Project Case): The financial misconduct case was discontinued through nolle prosequi.
Dr. Johnson Asiama (Banking Sector Cleanup): The former Deputy Governor of the Bank of Ghana, now acting Governor, was cleared of charges related to the collapse of UniBank and UT Bank.
Samuel Ofosu Ampofo & Anthony Kwaku Boahen (Leaked Recording Case): The former NDC Chairman and Communications Officer were freed from charges linked to an alleged political violence plot.
Mawuse Oliver Barker-Vormawor, Felicity Nelson, Ama Governor & Others: Charges against these activists were also dropped, regarding their involvement in the anti-galamsey protest.
No Political Influence in Prosecution Decisions
Dr Ayine rejected claims that the discontinuations were politically motivated, stressing that President John Dramani Mahama did not interfere in the decision-making process.
“Those who are in a haste to tag the President as a clearing agent should hasten slowly because he is not responsible for prosecutions,” he stated.
The Attorney General emphasized that his review was case-specific, evidenced by the fact that some accused persons in the SSNIT and banking cases are still facing trial. He assured the public that all decisions were made based on legal merit and not political pressure.
Dr. Ayine also hinted at concerns regarding judicial conduct in some cases, suggesting that certain judges exhibited undue hostility toward accused persons while displaying bias in favor of the prosecution.
While he refrained from naming specific judges, he noted that such behaviour undermines fair trial standards and judicial integrity.
The Attorney General’s move has drawn mixed reactions. Supporters argue that the withdrawals demonstrate integrity and a commitment to justice, while critics accuse him of shielding political figures from accountability.
While the nolle prosequi mechanism allows cases to be revisited in the future, the withdrawal of charges effectively clears the accused unless new evidence emerges.
The discourse surrounding prosecutorial discretion, political influence, and judicial fairness is expected to intensify in the coming weeks.
Dr. Dominic Ayine’s justification for discontinuing these cases highlights the delicate balance between prosecutorial independence, legal ethics, and public interest.
His firm stance on transparency in prosecutorial decisions marks a departure from traditional practice but also raises questions about the extent of executive influence in high-profile prosecutions.
As Ghana navigates these legal and political debates, the implications of these decisions will continue to reverberate across the justice system and the political landscape.
READ ALSO: Political Interference Undermines ECG’s Financial Performance, Expert Says
