A Principal State Attorney, Stella Ohene Appiah wants the new judge, going to take over the trial of former COCOBOD boss and two others, to know that the retired Supreme Court judge, Justice Clemence Honyenuga, had been a subject of several recusal applications.
The prosecution has therefore impressed upon Justice Honyenuga to include the latest motion seeking his recusal in the docket that would be transferred to the new judge.
For Stella Ohene Appiah, adding the recusal motion would be a testament to the unsuccessful attempts by the accused persons to remove him from the case, to possibly serve as a guide to the new judge.
“I also think that it should be on the docket as proof of how many times the accused persons have tried to unseat the previous trial judge,” she submitted during the last sitting on March 1, 2023.
Justice Clemence Honyenuga, who retired on September 4, 2022, has been presiding over the trial of former COCOBOD Chief Executive, Dr. Stephen Opuni and businessman Seidu Agongo as well as Agricult Ghana Limited, who are facing 27 charges, including willfully causing financial loss to the state and contravention of the Public Procurement Act in the purchase of Lithovit liquid fertiliser between 2014 and 2016.
He has been sitting with additional responsibility as a High Court judge.
Seidu Agongo in February filed a motion at the court asking the retired trial judge to recuse himself for allegedly being bias and issuing threatening orders in court.
“That by rejecting the exculpatory evidence and marking them as rejects thus ensuring that we can never rely on the said exhibits at the trial while at the same time calling on us to open our defence in respect of the very same matters means that this Court has already sealed our fate and only wants us to go through a sham of a trial when it has already predetermined our guilt even before we are heard especially when similar evidence tendered by the Prosecution was spared the wrath of this Court,” Mr. Agongo’s affidavit in support of the motion said in part.
Read also: Sham trial! Agongo’s lawyers raise ‘very serious’ issues to get retired Justice Honyenuga out
But when the court sat on February 23 to hear the motion, the Attorney General, through his Deputy, Mr. Alfred Tuah-Yeboah, acknowledged that it was impossible for the retired judge to conclude the case, and therefore requested him to refer the case to the Chief Justice to reassign it to a new judge.
“Looking at today, 23rd [February], the days left are so limited that if we were to say my lord should continue with the hearing of this matter, he cannot conclude it. So practically we thought it wise to bring such an application before him for him to refer the matter to the Chief Justice so that another judge would be appointed by the Chief Justice to hear this particular matter,” Mr. Tuah-Yeboah explained to journalists later.
Sitting was adjourned to March 1, but when the court sat for continuation, retired Justice Honyenuga enquired from counsel for Seidu Agongo, lawyer Nutifafa Nutsukpui, what his “stand on that [recusal] motion” was, now that a new judge is expected to take over the case.
Counsel then submitted, “Respectfully My Lord, it will be our submission that the said motion being a process on the case docket remains on the docket for the Chief Justice to reassign to the new person to consider.”
He added, “Our view respectfully is that at the point of the decision where the court would have made the order to return the brief to the Chief Justice the motion had already been filed and forms part of the docket for all purposes.
“So it will be our prayer that the docket as it is be returned in its entirety to the Chief Justice for reassignment.”
Although in her initial response, Stella Ohene Appiah felt adding the motion was not necessary, she shifted position.
“My Lord respectfully, I am of the opinion that since the docket is going to be reassigned then the application for recusal will no longer be necessary and so there is nothing wrong with counsel withdrawing it at this stage.
“However, if counsel wants the application to go before a new judge as part of the records from this court, I also think that it should be on the docket as proof of how many times the accused persons have tried to unseat the previous trial judge.
“My Lord, may be it will serve a good purpose along the line so it should be there if counsel insists.”
By Court
“Now, this is my ruling on the submissions by the Deputy Attorney General. I must state that it is refreshing that Attorney General who initiated the Criminal proceedings against the accused persons has submitted through the Deputy Attorney General that this case be referred to the Chief Justice due to the limited time at my disposal,” retired Justice Honyenuga acknowledged.
He further stated: “Indeed, due to the limited time accorded me by the Chief Justice to continue to hear this case, it is crystally clear that it is impossible for me to conclude and determine this case with DW7 in the box.
“In the circumstance, I will uphold the submission of the Deputy Attorney General and hereby grant the application under Section 105 of the Court’s Act, 1993, Act 459 as amended.
“It is hereby ordered that the pendency of this case be reported to the Chief Justice for his directions. Accordingly, the Registrar of this court is to carry out this order forthwith.”
He therefore adjourned the case to the 15th of March, 2023.