<<Print>>

President of policy think tank, IMANI Ghana, Franklin Cudjoe has defended President John Dramani who has been accused of blocking former Attorney General, Martin Amidu’s oral examination of embattled businessman, Alfred Agbesi Woyome.

According to him, Amidu is making such claim against the President because he is peeved at the Mahama-led administration.

“I think he is making the point because he is really peeved because of some of the things that have been said about him in the course of chasing Woyome,” he said on The Big Issue on Saturday.

Martin Amidu’s hope of orally examining Woyome over the GHC51 million judgment debt saga was cut short after Mr. Woyome filed an application to challenge the Supreme Court’s earlier decision.

Mr. Amidu has however accused President Mahama of instigating Woyome’s application in a bid to prevent Woyome from blowing the cover of some members of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) who are said to have benefited from the money.

But Franklin Cudjoe argued that though President Mahama could do that, he said “I’m not entirely sure that the President personally is involved in making sure that the cross examination didn’t come on, even if he wields it because it is a court process.”

Woyome saga could have been controlled

Mr. Cudjoe also noted that the Woyome brouhaha could have been put to rest much earlier if the stakeholders in charge discharged their duties well enough as expected of them.

“I think that indeed this Woyome saga could have been put to rest much earlier had the various actors acted quite early and in good faith as well,” he added.

Background

Martin Amidu, was scheduled to interrogate Woyome over how he intends to pay back the GHc 51 million judgment debt unlawfully paid him by the state.

But on Wednesday Mr. Woyome’s lawyers filed two writs in the Supreme Court seeking a review of an earlier decision that would have allowed Mr. Amidu to examine Alfred Woyome.

The second application is a request for a stay of proceedings to enable the court to determine the motion for review.

However, Mr. Amidu also filed an affidavit on Friday to counter Mr. Woyome’s application.

In the affidavit Amidu said Woyome’s application is “intended to subvert the order of this court dated 16th November 2016.”

“I oppose the application for stay of proceedings on the main ground that it discloses no reasonable ground or grounds for the making of an application for stay of proceedings to this Court pending the discharge or reversal of the ruling and order of this Court dated 16th November 2016 aforesaid to warrant its consideration by this Court.”

“Furthermore, the mere allegation that the 3rd Defendant/Applicant is dissatisfied with and aggrieved by the said ruling or that there had been misdirection or a series of them is not a fair, just, or special circumstance warranting an application for the grant of stay of proceeding in this action,” Mr. Amidu argued.