RE: ATTORNEY GENERAL FAILED TO PURSUE WATERVILLE CASE DUE TO MISSING DOCUMENTS: GOVERNMENT AND ATTORNEY GENERAL STOP THE LIES – BY MARTIN A. B. K. AMIDU

I have read the online reportage in citifmonline, of 23rd June 2013, a vilifying statement made about me by one Victor Kojoga Adawudu who is described as a member of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) Legal Team. Mr. Adawudu accuses me in some portions expressly and in other portions impliedly of having taken away some documents from the Attorney General’s Department resulting in the latter’s inability to pursue claims against Waterville and Woyome. I write to refute the allegations as baseless, false, malicious and libelous publications intended by the office of the Attorney General to vilify me for fulfilling my constitutional obligation of defending the 1992 Constitution pursuant to Articles 2 and 3 thereof. I returned from New York on 22nd December 2011 having made up my mind never to take possession of the Waterville/Woyome file or allow it to be left in my office. This was because I was lucky to have travelled to the 10th Session of the International Criminal Court at the United Nations Head office in New York with Mr. Cecil Adadevoh, a Senior State Attorney. When the Woyome judgment debt scandal broke out in New York, the Acting Director of Public Prosecutions who had also travelled with me to New York came to inform me that Mr. Cecil Adadevoh had told her he was the Attorney working up to Mr. Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh (Chief State Attorney) on the case. I debriefed Mr. Adadevoh in the presence of the Acting Director of Public Prosecution and he disclosed amongst other things that the office did not have the original docket on the Waterville/Woyome cases. It transpired that the Attorney General’s Department had all along been using an incomplete file allegedly built by Mr. Nerquaye-Tetteh without a copy of any of the two signed contracts dated 26th April 2006 on file. Consequently, on 23rd December 2011 when the file was brought to my office by the Chief State Attorney, Samuel Nerquaye-Tetteh, in the company of the Solicitor-General (Mrs. Amma Gaisie) for my first briefing on the Alfred Agbesi Woyome judgment debt scandal which had infected the Ghanaian political environment, I never took custody of the file or permitted it to be left in my office. I am out of that office but I hope Mr. Adadevoh would be honourable enough to confirm that anytime he wanted me to have the file I asked him to make available to me only photocopies of the relevant pages we had discussed. There was, therefore, no way by which I could have taken copies of the documents from Waterville/Woyome files to deprive that Office of pursuing the cases when I left office. Incidentally, the exhibits annexed to the Attorney General’s Statement of 1st Defendant’s Case prepared, signed, and filed in the Supreme Court by Chief State Attorney, Mrs. Dorothy Afriyie-Ansah, which contains documents which were not in the incomplete file exposes the lies being supplied by the Attorney General’s office to the NDC Legal Team with the active approval of the Government to vilify me as a documents’ thief. For example, the two signed contracts with Waterville dated 26th April 2006 were not on the file at the time the settlements were made but upon my advice the Attorney General’s Department got copies which were duly filed. The story Mr. Nerquaye-Tetteh told the Deputy Attorney General, Barton Odro, the Solicitor General, Amma Abuakwa Gaisie, the Chief Director, Ahmed Suleiman and my poor self at the meeting of 23rd December 2011 was that the original file got missing since 2006 when he delivered the file to the then, Attorney General, Hon. Joe Ghartey, who never returned same when he was leaving office in 2009. I asked Mr. Nerquaye-Tetteh whether he delivered the file to Hon Joe Ghartey through the approved process by ensuring it was signed and received at the Attorney General’s office. He said: “No!”. I asked him what evidence he had that he delivered the file to Hon. Joe Ghartey to enable me write to Hon. Joe Ghartey to return the file or indicate the officer with whom he left it in the Ministry. Mr. Nerquaye-Tetteh replied that he had none. He indicated that the file in his current possession was built by him from scratch that was why the documents were incomplete. I asked the Solicitor-General to ensure that her office contacted the Ministries and Departments involved in the case to have copies of at least the signed contracts on file before an investigation came to discover that the Attorney General’s office at that time settled the cases without seeing signed copies of the contracts. I instructed the Solicitor-General, Mrs. Amma Abuakwa Gaisie, as the head of the Civil Division of the Attorney General’s office on 23rd December 2011 to supervise the building of a complete file on the Waterville/Woyome case and assumed it had been done. I left office in the evening of 19th January 2012 without being allowed to hand over or say good bye to the staff. Does the fact that the Attorney General was permitted by the technical staff to settle the alleged Waterville/Woyome judgment debts without reading the complete file not reflect disgracefully on the Solicitor General who is presumed to be the most technically knowledgeable legal officer in the Department and also as head of the Civil Division? On 13th January 2012 Captain Kojo Tsikata (Rtd), former PNDC Member, who I considered a mentor persuaded me forcefully in the Chief of Staff’s conference room not to resign but to pursue the objects of the June 4 and the 31st December Revolution by ensuring that I went to Court to retrieve the Woyome monies for Ghana. I had in writing demanded a draft amended Writ, and Statement of Claim to the Woyome case from the Solicitor General for my further action before filing at the High Court on 16th January 2012 which she never produced as at the close of work of Friday 13th January 2012. I respected Captain Tsikata as a mentor and elder, and acceded to his pleas. I then called the Acting Chief Director to summon the Solicitor General, Mrs. Nana Dontoh, and Mrs. Afriyei-Ansah, (both Chief State Attorneys) to wait and meet me in my office to start the processes of drafting and filing the amendment on Monday. I explained to the meeting what was to be done to retrieve the monies not only from Woyome but also how we were to join Waterville and Austro Invest to the suit after the High Court had granted us the amendment of both the writ and statement of claim. I directed the Chief Director to make available all logistics to enable the officers assembled to work on the Saturday and Sunday. I explained to the team when we met on Sunday evening why each of the reliefs was couched in the manner it was written and what informed each paragraph of the Statement of Claim. I repeated several times that we had to join Waterville and Austro Invest to enable us move the High Court to refer the constitutional issues to the Supreme Court as our ultimate aim. Why did the Solicitor General not ensure the joinder of Waterville and Austro Invest to the suit when the amendments were granted? I had settled the pleadings in such a way that no further amendment was needed after the joinder. There was no way the office could prove its case without joining at least Waterville to the action. The judgment and orders of the Supreme Court delivered on 14th June 2013 now makes the case against Woyome easy as he would be unable to rely on anything related to the Waterville contracts of 2006. Mr. Adawudu should have known that not being a member of the Attorney General’s Department, even a fool will know that his falsehood that I took office documents away when my appointment was revoked was fed to him by the Government through the Attorney General’s office. The Solicitor General and her office who passed on the falsehood to the current Attorney General should be ashamed of themselves for maligning me just because I undertook a defence of the 1992 Constitution when the office failed to advice the then Attorney General that international business or economic transactions such as the Waterville and Isofoton contracts could not be settled when they had not been approved by Parliament. In any case was it not the same Solicitor General who supported Nerquaye-Tetteh’s memorandum in her memo of 3rd November 2011 to me requesting me to authorize the withdrawal of the Woyome action pending at the High Court and to make further payment to Woyome which I refused to endorse? At that time I had not yet been informed as the Attorney General that Nerquaye-Tetteh was suspected of having been paid an amount GH¢400,000.00 by Woyome, half of which he used to deposit for a house at Ridge and the other half used in buying treasury bills. It was later alleged that the cheque was issued in the name of his wife. Under the watch of the Solicitor General, her officers were operating on incomplete files in settling unconstitutional contracts, so why am I being accused unjustifiably by the Government which is still comfortable working with the Mr. Nerquaye-Tettehs and their likes. Background checks I quickly made on Mr. Victor Kojoga Adawudu indicates that he was a junior in Awoonor Law Consultancy (ALC) who arbitrated the alleged Waterville claims and awarded Waterville the 25 million Euro which the Supreme Court ordered to be refunded on 14th June 2013. He moved out of Awoonor Law Consultancy just a few months ago to set up chambers with friends at Adabraka. This is the member of the NDC Legal Team who is being used by a former partner in Lithur Brew & Company (Lawyers for Austro Invest) who is now Attorney General to vilify me for allegedly taking office documents away when I left office. The use of a political party’s legal team to vilify a senior member of that political party without any sanction from the political party sends a wrong signal when the Constitution of that party mandates a defence of probity, and accountability. The founder of the NDC has shown NDC and the Government what the NDC stands for but alas those now in control cannot hear nor see the way to probity and accountability? Finally I have to say that the Government and those subgroups in the NDC who are against the results of the two Supreme Court judgments have persistently endangered my life and personal security since I commenced my action in the Supreme Court in June 2012. By continuing to vilify me even after the Supreme Court has spoken the Government and its aggrieved party friends are literally informing the foreign companies and other aggrieved Ghanaians that they are at liberty to endanger my life and personal security. Whatever happens, I, Martin Alamisi Amidu will not regret dying for defending the Constitution and people of Ghana – Ghana a naturally rich country in which the vast majority of the youth, even with university degrees, are unemployed and poverty is avoidably daily extinguishing the lives of my fellow citizens. Fear is the enemy of Change! Martin A. B. K Amidu Post Script I phoned Mr. Charles Takyi-Boadu of Daily Guide at 3:20 pm today, 27th June 2013, to thank him for reading my current thoughts by re-publishing a previous story under the title: “My Life in Danger Martin Amidu cried Out” yesterday. I told him my statement of rejoinder to the accusation of my theft of documents from the Attorney General’s office will be posted today to appear on my webpage tomorrow morning. I asked him to send me his email address so I could send him a copy, which he did. At 3.58 pm the National Security Coordinator phoned to say he had just returned from abroad and read the concerns about my security and wanted us to talk. I asked him to read an email I had sent to him on Friday 21st June 2013 first and let us continue talking. I add this post script to this statement for purposes of accountability and transparency to the public as I completed this statement of rejoinder on 24th June 2013 but had to let it abide my statement of rejoinder in answer to the Ministry of Information and Government’s allegation of my failure to name the names of those who committed the gargantuan judgment debt crimes against the people of Ghana. That statement of rejoinder was published on 26th June 2013. Long live the concept of “Ghana First”.

MY TRIBUTE TO MARTIN AMIDU: HOW TO WIN SOME AND LOSE SOME, BUT WIN, ULTIMATELY

The NDC government’s dismissal of Martin Amidu was Ghana’s gain. When the government thought that it had gotten rid of the irritating pain in its backside by firing Martin as Attorney-General, it only gave to Ghana, a reluctant hero and champion. I do not agree with all of Martin’s positions, which is natural. But I must applaud his dogged, fighting spirit. In the face of the blatant stealing of this nations’ monies by a cabal with obvious official participation and complicity, the shameful and reprehensible cheering and defence of the stealing (notably by persons working in the office of the then President, at least one of whom has now been rewarded with a Ministerial appointment), the appalling and inexcusable ‘interim’ non-investigation by EOCO, and the shocking and scandalous lack of interest in prosecuting the civil recovery and the crime (until recently, and I must commend the current AG for this), many of us could only speak and write. NOTE: To date, the government had taken absolutely no step to recover the monies paid to Waterville!! But Martin would not take all of that rubbish lying down. He took it a step further. He went to court against Waterville, Woyome and the Attorney-General, at his own expense. Today, I sat in court when the judgment was delivered. I left in awe of the man. Some of his claims were upheld and others were dismissed. Yet the court, without any equivocation or prevarication, was unanimous and undivided in its high praise and commendation of Martin and his vigilante role. I now turn to my summary of what I heard the court say. The Unanimous Decision (9-0), by Dr. Date-Bah JSC Waterville: the contracts entered into between the Government and Waterville, were unconstitutional since parliamentary approval was not obtained, in breach of article 181(5) of the Constitution for the international business transaction to which the Republic was a party. All payments made to Waterville (both after the consultants’ appraisal and after the alleged mediation) were therefore unconstitutional. They did not fall properly under the sparing circumstances under which a person whose contract is declared void for being in breach of the Constitution would be entitled to restitution. Waterville was ordered to refund all monies paid to if by the government, including the Euro 25 million paid to it by the government after mediation. Woyome: the court dismissed the claims/reliefs sought against him on the ground that they did not raise any constitutional interpretation/enforcement issues under article 181(5), which would have properly trigger its exclusive and special jurisdiction. The key question affecting Woyome, is whether or not there was a contract between the Government and Woyome at all. Indeed, in Woyome’s own Statement of Claim in his action at the High Court, he does not show any contractual basis for his claim. Thus a determination as to whether or not there was a contract or a cause of action at all, is one that should be determined by the High Court, as it did not involve any constitutional issue for interpretation or enforcement. Attorney-General: The court took note of the claims against the state’s legal representatives for their actions in the matter and stated that those claims, also, did not involve any constitutional issue for interpretation or enforcement, and as such dismissed them and advised the Plaintiff to pursue those claims before a High Court. Conduct of named lawyers (particularly for Waterville and Woyome): The court referred Martin’s claims against the lawyers in the matter to the Disciplinary Committee of the General Legal Council and stated that the Plaintiff may continue his complaint in that forum. It ordered the SC Registry to serve a copy of its judgment on the GLC for further action. Obiter, by Jones Dotse JSC: This was the more dramatic and striking opinion. He concurred with the unanimous decision, but decided to read what he termed a “commentary.” His Lordship pulled no punches, barred no holds and took no prisoners when he excoriated the lawyers who acted in the matter, particularly for Waterville and Woyome. He stated that there was sufficient evidence (particularly the now famous Tetteh & Co. letter) that there was no contract to be enforced, but that Waterville and Woyome had an “alliance to create, loot and share” Ghana’s resources. He noted how Waterville and Woyome (using different lawyers) were first opposed to each other, then started acting together using the same lawyer (Waterville’s lawyer) to recover the monies they received, and then before the Supreme Court, that same lawyer now only appeared as Waterville’s lawyer. He stated that there was no sound legal basis for their claims, and that the lawyers should have known this and advised their clients, instead of leading them in the matter. Both Dr. Date-Bah and Dotse JJSC highly recommended Martin Amidu for his work. Dotse JSC pointed out that Martin has had to fight alone without any help, especially from civil society. My Conclusion: Martin has won; not for himself, but for Ghana. In the process, he has put us all to shame. source: Ace Ankomah

Why I Admire The Supreme Court Of Ghana

Many of us – if we’ll care to admit – had very little appreciation of how the Supreme Court of Ghana goes about the process of dispensing justice prior to this ongoing election petition. So: we can say there is an invaluable advantage to be gained by all of us with a LIVE telecast. No matter how much it is costing us to LIVE TV telecast the election 2012 petition trial, it is still worth our while – in my books. I have followed the LIVE TV telecast with keen interest. I have had an appreciation for a lot of things – legally and logically. I admire all the lawyers representing the various parties for various reasons. I admire Tony Lithur for his impeccable English expressions. His questions and probing keep viewers in animated suspense. He is charismatic and capable of intimidating a weak - minded witness into admitting things to their own detriment. He has clarity and he has swag in his presentation and appearance. He is most handsome, and no wonder most of his admirers are the women citizens of Ghana. This guy is boisterous in his presentation. Tsatsu Tsikata is very admired not just by me, but by multitudes following this legendary court case. He is like the god – father of the law. His deep appreciation and his tendency to try to interpret the law to the judges cannot go unnoticed. He gets the witness to admit things before realizing that they have spoken to their own detriment. His arguments are flawless. You will think that any lawyer is good until you hear Tsatsu Tsikata. He is a master of logic. He makes exhaustive arguments with unique legal and English expressions. His trade mark grey hair distinguishes him – even from the judges – none of whom has that animated appearance. I admire him very much for his ability to litigate unabated until the judges’ rule in his favor. I admire Philip Addison too albeit, I oppose his petition. He seems to have good coaches surrounding him and whispering some ideas to him. He is very adroit at putting words into the mouth of witnesses. An unintelligent and unalert witness is most likely to crumble under Philip Addisson. Indeed, this guy can make a case out of no case. He also has a sense of fashion similar to Tony Lithur but his pot belly makes him less sexy. He tries to be bellicose with his language. He is good lawyer with a bad case in his hands. I admire Philip Addisson nevertheless. Quarshie Idun is the smoothest lawyer in the group. Old and gentle, he does not use flamboyant language or ‘bellicose rhetoric’ as the North Americans will say. He is also very adroit in detecting the right moment to intervene. His demeanor is pleasing not only to the nine judges and other lawyers at the bar but also to the general public. It looks like in his young days, he was a handsome man. His baritone voice is very pleasant to the ears. I admire him for his prudence in language and demeanor. I also admire Justice Atuguba very much. His manner of speaking seems to differentiate him as the president of the presiding judges. With a hand gesticulation, an undulating voice pitch, a low tone, and a succinct use of rare vocabulary, Justice Atuguba’s rulings are uncontestable. Indeed, he sounds like that invisible and invincible voice of the people. I admire him also because he appears as a very democratic president of the SC judges. I admire Amekudzi the Amicus Curae. His dramatic presentation in court twice was a great comic relief. His attempt to sound more American than the American President was something to laugh about. But more importantly, he is a detective of the right moment. He took advantage to be a part of the history in the making. He is a smart guy who failed woefully to make smart arguments in court but gained all the publicity for free. I admire the witnesses’ too but that is partisan admiration so I will leave that out. I admire justice, and hopefully, we should soon have it. But there are those who believe that injustice is more profitable than justice. What would we rather have? I know I will admire the final SC verdict on election 2012. SaCut ‘’Commandante’’ Amenga –Etego – The writer is a multi – media Journalist, ghost writer and political activist in Ghana