Prime News Ghana

Calls for Betty Mould-Iddrisu, Osafo-Maafo to answer questions on Woyome saga irrelevant

By Mutala Yakubu
Betty Mould-Iddrisu and Osafo-Maafo
Betty Mould-Iddrisu and Osafo-Maafo
Shares
facebook sharing button Share
twitter sharing button Tweet
email sharing button Email
sharethis sharing button Share

Some legal practitioners contacted by PrimeNewsGhana.com have described as irrelevant, calls by some individuals on the former Youth and Sports Minister under the Kufuor Administration, Yaw Osafo-Maafo and former Minister of Justice and Attorney General under the Mills Administration, Betty Mould-Iddrisu to answer some questions over their role in the Woyome judgement debt saga.



According to the Legal Practitioners spoken to, once those former government appointees in one way or the other testified during the trial, or were available as witnesses for the recovery of the monies paid to Mr. Woyome, any subsequent call on them to answer a questions or to come out and tell their side of the story to the public, especially after the case is needless and will not change the determination and ruling made by the Supreme Court on the matter.

The Supreme Court ordered for the sale of Mr. Woyome's properties to defray the ₵51.2m wrongfully paid to him as judgement debt during the Mills Administration.

Mr Woyome, following the Supreme Court's ruling also filed and lost a case against the State at the Africa Court on Human and People's Rights citing infringement on his rights.

Chairman of the People’s National Congress (PNC) Bernard Mornah and the Editor-in-Chief of the New Crusading Guide Newspaper, Abdul Malik Kweku Baako have all made comments to the effect that the two former Ministers should  come out to clear the air by answering certain questions in respect of their roles in the whole judgement debt saga.

On Saturday Benard Mornah speaking on TV3 said, “Half of the story has been told, the other side has not been told. The role of Osafo-Maafo and Betty Mould-Iddrisu is not known; so we should be interested in getting to the bottom of this.”

Mr Baako who was also speaking on Joy FM's Newsfile on June 28, 2019, said: “It is time to interrogate the missing link,”.

Mr. Baako believes both officials need to answer questions on how the ₵51.2m was paid to the businessman as judgement debt.

However some legal practitioners PrimeNewsGhana.com spoke to indicate that the calls for the two to speak again is irrelevant as the Court considered their testimonies before arriving at the determination they made on the matter.

According to the lawyers Primenewsghana spoke to, the calls made to the former appointees are belated in the sense that the then Attorney General; Betty Mould-Iddrisu, who initially backed the payments went back to court to protest it, arguing that she was under a mistaken belief that Woyome had a case against the state.

Mr Osafo-Maafo was also in court on several occasions and after a series of back and forth, his case was dismissed.

Background

Former Attorney General Betty Mould-Iddrisu and former Youth and Sports Minister Yaw Osafo-Maafo have been called out by some public figures to speak on their involvement with the Woyome judgement debt saga.

Chairman of the People’s National Congress (PNC) Bernard Mornah and Editor in chief of the New Crusading Guide Newspaper Abdul Malik Kweku Baako have all called out the two to do due diligence by explaining the role they played in the whole judgement debt saga.

Mr Baako who was speaking on Joy FM's Newsfile on June 28, 2019, said: “It is time to interrogate the missing link,” .

He believes both officials need to answer questions on how the ₵51.2m was paid to the businessman as judgement debt.

Meanwhile, Bernard Mornah speaking on TV3’s The Key Points program on Saturday, June 28, 2019, also said: "Half of the story has been told, the other side has not been told. The role of Osafo-Maafo and Betty Mould-Iddrisu is not known; so we should be interested in getting to the bottom of this.”

Current Senior Minister Mr Yaw Osafo-Maafo who was Sports Minister in the run-up to the 2008 Africa Cup of Nations is said to have given Mr Woyome a contract to raise funds for the construction of stadia for the tournament.

Woyome after the changed of government in 2009 filed a claim for judgement debt for the abrogation of financial engineering services with government.

It later emerged, he did not deserve the monies despite the contrary position held by no less functionaries such as Deputy Attorney-General, Barton-Oduro and Deputy Chief of Staff, Alex Segbefia.

Attorney-General, Betty Mould-Iddrisu, initially backed the payments but went back to court to protest it, arguing that she was under a mistaken belief that Woyome had a case against the state.

However, an Auditor General’s report released in 2010, held that the amount was paid illegally to him.

Subsequently, the Supreme Court in 2014 ordered Mr Woyome to pay back the money, after a former Attorney General, Martin Amidu, single-handedly challenged the legality of the payments.

Following delays in retrieving the money, Supreme Court judges unanimously granted the Attorney-General clearance to execute the court’s judgement, ordering Mr Woyome to refund the cash to the State.

On Wednesday, June 27, the Supreme Court ordered the Attorney-General to sell properties of Woyome to defray a ¢51.2m debt he owes the state.

Assets to be sold include two houses at Trassaco Estate, a house at Kpehe, a stone quarry, plants and equipment at the stone quarry.

Mr Woyome faced more troubles as he lost his case against the state at the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights in Tanzania

The court unanimously dismissed his case against the Republic of Ghana.

The court said Woyome’s right to non-discrimination, right to equality before the law, equal protection before the law and his right to be heard by an impartial tribunal had all not been violated.

Woyome filed a case at the African Court on Human and People’s Rights in Tanzania in 2017, a day after his petition at the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) was thrown out.

His lawyers claimed that their decision to go to the Court is in respect of an abuse of the human rights of his client.

READ ALSO:

Â