The High Court in Accra has set June 13, 2024 to rule on whether or not to admit into evidence the audio recording involving the Attorney-General and businessman, Richard Jakpa in the ongoing ambulance case.
This was after the Attorney General objected to an attempt by lawyers for Minority Leader, Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson to tender into evidence the audio conversation between the third accused and Godfred Yeboah Dame.
The audio recording, which was admitted and formed the basis of the trial judge’s ruling on a mistrial on June 6, 2024, is being tendered into evidence again because, according to the defense lawyers, it constitutes significant foundation for the AG’s charge of causing financial loss to the state.
Lead counsel for Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson, Aziz Bamba argued that the telephone conversation hinged largely on the agreement between the government of Ghana and the Letter of Credit that was subsequently issued, making the 16-minute recording an important piece in the ongoing trial.
He further contended that the AG’s posture in the audio recording constitutes willful oppression of the accused and that it is not the Attorney General’s place to be giving theories to an accused person in an ongoing trial.
Aziz Bamba concluded his argument by stating that the audio is relevant because it shows that the case hasn’t been mounted in good faith.
The Attorney General had objected to the audio being tendered into evidence, arguing that no sufficient foundation has been laid for the audio to be admitted.
The AG contended that the sitting judge had dismissed the mistrial application, which was premised on the audio recording, by putting negligible weight on it, thus making it irrelevant for admission into evidence.
Furthermore, the AG argued that the tape does not cure the crime of causing financial loss to the state and questioned what crime the audio recording has prevented.
The Prosecution concluded its objection by accusing Richard Jakpa of breaching the AG’s right to privacy.
The trial will continue on Thursday after a ruling on the objection by the Attorney General.