An Accra High Court has denied a request by counsel for Dr Stephen Kwabena Opuni for the trial judge to discontinue the case due to a likelihood of bias.
The trial judge, Justice Aboagye Tandoh, said, “I have examined the affidavit and oral submission, indeed, to disqualify a judge must be on firm grounds and convincing enough.”
He said with the reasons given, mere allegations would not suffice.
Dr Opuni and Mr Agongo, a businessman are facing 27 charges, including defrauding by false pretences, wilfully causing financial loss to the State, money laundering, and corruption by a public officer in contravention of the Public Procurement Act.
They have both pleaded not guilty to the charges and are on a GH¢300,000.00 self-recognizance bail, each.
Justice Tandoh said asking Counsel to stand up could not be biased and “I have conducted this case without fear or favor. I refrain from commenting, except to say the court has always acted fairly to all parties.
The Judge said assigned dates were given on a case-by-case basis and the matter had taken more than six years in court.
“The case has taken a toll on their time. The dates taken for this trail were and must not be interpreted as a real likelihood of bias,” he added.
He said the seventh defence witness would mount the witness box and continue with cross examination on November 2, 2023.
Earlier, Samuel Cudjoe Counsel for Dr Opuni moved the motion saying, “this is the motion of notice praying that you recuse yourself from continuing hearing the case on the basis of real likelihood of bias.”
He stated that they had produced a lot of facts about what the trial judge had done that gave them grounds to believe that if he continued with this case, he would be biased.
Mr Cudjoe stated that the parties had agreed on a timetable for the past three years, but the trial Judge refused to follow it.
He claimed that, there was a further bias if one considered that, aside from their case, dates had never been provided as the Judge did.
Mr Cudjoe argued that there was a likelihood of bias based on what transpired on Wednesday, November 1, 2023, with regard to the giving of dates and various other circumstances, including the adoption of proceedings.
Mrs Evelyn Keelson, Chief State Attorney, said they were opposed to Mr Cudjoe’s application for the trial Judge to recuse himself from further hearing the case.
She stated that the applicant had claimed “a real likelihood of bias,” but had failed to substantiate it throughout his submissions.
“My lord, all that the applicant complains about is the fact, my lord, as enabled by the laws of this land, has exercised reasonable control over proceedings in his court by giving us dates for a day-to-day trial, excluding Fridays and the last Wednesday of every month,” she said.
She pointed out that it was unusual for an accused person, innocent until proven, to be forced to a six-year trial with all its inconveniences, let alone a witness who has been in the witness box for over a year.
The Chief State Attorney said adjournment was at the Judge’s discretion, which had been exercised, and that all parties involved in the case had agreed to comply.
She argued that, no evidence or proof had been provided to the Judge to prove that he was biased towards the applicant.
“The fact that the applicant and Counsel are uncomfortable with how the court is managing its affairs within the law is not proof of bias and mere allegations of bias do not also constitute bias,” she added.