Mr. Kofi Bekai, a private legal practitioner, believes it is insufficient for the third accused in the ambulance purchase trial, Richard Jakpa, to allege in open court that Godfred Dame approached him several times, asking his assistance in implicating the first accused, Dr. Ato Forson.
The lawyer explained that the accused should move beyond his allegations and offer the necessary evidence to back them up.
Dr. Forson, a former Deputy Finance Minister and current Minority Leader, has been dragged to court by the state for his alleged role in the procurement of faulty ambulances for Ghana.
In court on May 23, 2024, the third accused person under cross-examination alleged that the Attorney General had approached him to implicate the former deputy minister.
Reacting to this, Mr. Bekai said the accused should not wait to be dared before giving the essential evidence.
He stated that the lawyers defending the accused know what to do.
He advised that if there was anything incriminating or evidence that the accused person had, he should inform his lawyers since they know what to do.
He indicated this may not be something the judge may want to deal with, especially when it is not part of the evidence before the court.
“The judge may not deal with these allegations because they do not form part of the evidence or other documentation before the court. As for the judge, he or she is unaware of these issues. He or she is not aware the parties have met. Whatever is in court or before the court is what they are dealing with.
If the accused person indeed has the evidence he claims, his lawyers know exactly what to do.”
He further stated that if required, the judge would investigate the matter, examine all available information, and issue a decision.
The lawyer also challenged the NDC to provide the needed evidence to support the statement it issued on the matter since they have aimed to show that there is judicial manipulation in the ongoing matter.
He said the allegations by the accused person can best be described as fallacious until evidence has been produced.
“Some witnesses can peddle falsehoods or commit perjury while testifying in a matter. That is why, when testifying in a matter, people swear by whatever means to speak the truth. So if the person has sworn to testify and has made these allegations, he should do the proper thing by informing the court and providing the needed evidence so the court will investigate or go into it instead of coming in public and running around with these allegations. If you fail to do these things and go about making claims, the court will not do anything about it.
The accused individual has lawyers defending him, and if he wants this matter treated seriously in court and decided by the court, he should inform the lawyers, they know what to do. They have an obligation to tell the court; instead of making these allegations and throwing dust in the eyes of the public, they should submit the processes and ask the court’s permission to determine the matter.
He (the accused) has dared the Attorney General to challenge him, and he will supply the necessary evidence. But, in my honest opinion, if he wants to be dared, he knows what to do. His lawyers understand what to do. If the allegations you’ve made are true, you don’t wait to be dared before presenting evidence. If you have evidence, you must supply it or bring the case to court and present it.”
By: Rainbowradioonline com/Ghana
