Justice Clemence Jackson Honyenuga was taken aback when he got to know that former COCOBOD boss, Dr. Stephen Opuni, won’t mount the witness box, albeit for now, as he opens his defence in the infamous COCOBOD trial.
Sounding livid, the judge then appeared to question why Dr. Opuni elected the former Director of Finance at COCOBOD as the first witness, but Dr. Opuni’s counsel, Samuel Codjoe stood up to the challenge.
“Ah why is the first accused [Dr. Opuni] not being the first,” Justice Honyenuga asked.
Lawyer Codjoe pointed out that the choice of who testifies and the order in which witnesses are called remains his client’s sole prerogative.
“My Lord, no law stops us from starting our defence with this witness. There is no requirement that directs how we call our witnesses in defence. In fact it is even possible the first accused may not testify. In fact Article 19 (2g) states it clear,” he pointed out.
He asserted, “My Lord, the Prosecution was not restrained or asked or directed as to how its witnesses were called to testify and we believe we have equal rights to call which witness we want.”
The former COCOBOD Chief Executive and businessman Seidu Agongo are standing trial together with Agricult Ghana Limited for allegedly causing the state to lose over GH¢217 million in cocoa fertilizer transactions. They have pleaded not guilty to all charges levelled against them.
The court sat for the first time on Thursday, November 2, 2021 following the reinstatement of Justice Clemence Honyenuga of the Supreme Court, as trial judge, by a review panel of the Supreme Court.
Following the submission of Dr. Opuni’s counsel concerning the defence witness, the prosecution led by Principal State Attorney Stella Ohene Appiah did not object.
Justice Honyenuga, who is sitting with additional responsibility as a High Court judge, had no choice but to allow the witness, former Director of Finance at COCOBOD, Charles Tetteh Dodoo to testify.
“By court, indeed this court cannot compel the first accused person to give evidence and this is supported by Article 19 clause 10.
“In the circumstances, it is the right of first accused to choose the mode he intends to open his defence, consequently, the witness can testify.”
Early on, Justice Honyenuga shot down application by Samuel Codjoe filed on the 24th November, 2021 invoking the original jurisdiction of his client.
The relief, among others, is seeking a perpetual injunction restraining the court from continuing with the hearing of the case until the determination by the Supreme Court.
“I don’t want you to go into the matter. What you have said is enough. I don’t want to listen to any authority,” the judge said.
Lawyer for the second and third accused, Nutifafa Nutsukpui sided with Mr. Codjoe and prayed the court, as a practice, to adjourn hearing until the determination of the application.
But Stella Ohene Appiah opposed the application, noting that the mere fact that a writ has been filed doesn’t mean that the court should suspend the hearing.
“It is my respected opinion that although the first accused has filed a writ invoking the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, the writ which came to my attention only this morning, there is no order of stay of proceedings by the supreme Court ordering this court from the continuation of this case. I remember that on July 1, 2021, l ruled and adjourned an application to invoke the original supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court because of
the circumstance at that time. This case has travelled the length and breathe of the Supreme Court and with the Supreme Court having not ordered this court to stay proceeding,” Justice Honyenuga subsequently rejected the application.
Hearing was adjourned to Monday, 6th December, not without drama, as the trial judge banged his folders on the desk and stormed out of the courtroom after Dr. Opuni’s lawyer disagreed with the adjourned date because he had a medical appointment on the set date.
