Deputy Attorney General Alfred Tuah-Yeboah has explained that Attorney General, Godfred Dame’s statement following the ruling of the Court of Appeal on the ambulance procurement case expressed their disagreement with the judgment, which is within the rights of any lawyer.
On Tuesday, the Court of Appeal acquitted and discharged Minority Leader Dr Cassiel Ato Forson and Richard Jakpa, the third accused, in the ambulance case. This 2:1 decision overturned a previous trial court order that required Dr Ato Forson and Jakpa to open their defense.
In a statement issued by the Attorney General shortly after the ruling, Godfred Dame indicated that his office “considers the decision of the Court of Appeal to be perverse in the quest for public accountability and the rule of law. The decision clearly is heavily against the weight of the cogent evidence led by the prosecution in substantiation of all the charges against the accused persons at the trial.”
Speaking on the JoyNews AM Show, Mr Tuah-Yeboah said, “Any lawyer, for that matter, every litigant, has the right to criticize a judgment, but not the judge. So, this statement is in relation to the judgment so delivered “.
He said that a lawyer can criticize a judgment, calling it unreasonable, illogical, or perverse, but not criticize the court itself.
The Deputy Attorney General stated that the appeal they intend to seek aims to test whether the judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal can withstand legal scrutiny.
“And so, in going to the Supreme Court, we are going to argue legally why we think the judgment cannot be supported having regard to the evidence on record, and if the Supreme Court agrees to that, it would mean that the judgment would be set aside for us to come back to the trial court for the matter to continue.”
Some lawyers have argued that an appeal at the Supreme Court is not likely to be successful.
The National Democratic Congress (NDC) in particular has told the AG that would be disgraced at the Supreme Court it he goes ahead with his appeal.