The New Patriotic Party (NPP) Director for Legal Affairs, Garry Nimako Marfo, has said there is no legal or logical basis to support allegations that an application for reduction of bail conditions he had filed in court last Friday, was the reason the Party’s Ashanti Regional Chairman, Wontumi, spent the weekend in detention even when he had fully met the bail conditions.
Chairman Wontumi, officially known as Bernard Antwi Boasiako, was arrested last Tuesday by officials of the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) but he has since been on detention because he has not been able to meet the conditions of a bail term given him.
Last Friday night, Wontumi’s Lead Counsel, Andy Appiah-Kubi, told journalists that his client had been able to fully meet the bail condition of GHC50 million with two sureties both to be justified and was about to be released from custody when to his shock, he was informed that Garry Nimako had filed an application at the Courts seeking for a variation of the bail conditions therefore the entire process had to be put on hold until that application is withdrawn after the weekend.
Andy Appiah Kubi explained what he meant:
“…We have been able to provide the sureties, that one I can assure you and I am very grateful to Hon. Bryan Acheampong who has supported me to file the documents. He has brought his documents which goes over and above the value of money that is required.
“We encountered a challenge that has to be addressed before we can go forward. They had agreed to do the inspection tonight and all the officers are there but the challenge that I face are legal so we cannot do it. But I am grateful to them because they agreed to wait for us to bring the documents so they can go and inspect it but we had a legal challenge. Unknown to me, there was an application to frustrate what we are doing so we would deal with it on Monday. It was an application that was not filed by my good self but that prohibits us. That is what I am holding.
“Hopefully by Monday when this application is withdrawn, we would continue. In the pendency with this application none of us can proceed. But for this application, we would have ended today but unfortunately, our hands are tied”, Andy Appiah Kubi told journalist last Friday night.
Wontumi lead lawyer, Appiah Kubi also gave a few suggestions on how he felt the case should be handled:
“You don’t start throwing stones when you want to enter the house, the tie is 8 pm but we have public officers here and still waiting for us. It depends on how you conduct the business. We have been seen by the public officers and we have done what is our job dutifully to do.
“We encountered some difficulties which would be sorted out on Monday
Then we would have a fresh slate to operate and work towards the desired results. I beg all of you I would stay out of the politics and the theater and I would do the work within the law.”
NIMAKO DISAGREES
Garry Nimako Marfo, however took to his Facebook page to profess a different legal opinion to what Andy Appiah Kubi has told journalists on why Wontumi was still in security custody
“Setting the records straight! An application for variation of Bail Conditions is only intended to pray the Court to reduce the Conditions of the Bail sum of Ghc 50 Million with Justification. So if Lawyer Appiah Kubi claims they could meet the Bail Conditions, why was it not executed? The variation application is not an Injunction application or order to stop the execution of the Bail application. Lawyer Appiah-Kubi has only shown he has lack of understanding of the law and incompetence. Nothing more”, Garry Nimako wrote.
Mr. Nimako Marfo also spoke with Gordon Asare-Bediako on Wontumi TV:
“For me, the variation application could never have been a condition for someone to say they would not continue with the bail application even when the conditions had been fully met.
“If indeed the documents they had could fully meet the bail conditions, Wontumi would have been released. So nobody should use the application for reduction as an excuse and say it has stayed the bail bond. It is legally untenable. That cannot be and it could not have been. Is the variation application an injunction application against the bail bond?
“When there is a case involving the NPP as a Party, I am the Director, Legal and I have to step in immediately. If the case is about an individual, the person has a right to pick any lawyer of choice. I have stayed away from this case because from the beginning, it looked like a personal matter concerning Chairman and they themselves wanted to deal with it until the wife and the aide came to talk to me that I should step in.
“The thing is now being turned into a political matter and once it turns into a political matter, as Director Legal, I cannot sit back unconcerned. I cannot! So me wading into the matter was to solve the problem and for me to hear Andy say I did not inform him, it is disingenuous. He is telling lies to the public. He is telling lies. Ask him if I did not call him. We spoke for almost 30 minutes. It is disingenuous and I am saying that there is absolutely no way that a variation application to bring the terms and conditions down would frustrate a bail bond execution. There is absolutely no way. Let us not do such things, we should be honest with ourselves and to the client’s interest.
“Tell the public what happened but don’t tell the public that the variation application has frustrated the execution of the bail bond. What are you talking about? Was it only last night that I attended the Law School? What are you talking about? Call and ask any other lawyer if an application for a variation amounts to frustrating the execution of a bail bond. The way Andy has behaved is very wrong, disingenuous and unfair to the practice of our profession.
“The way forward is that I have called for the documents that they say meets the bail conditions. If it meets the bail conditions, we would go with it to execute the bail bond. Alternatively, the application for variation has to be moved for the court to intervene.
“But we should be asking ourselves which person at the Lands Commission was working as at 8 pm last Friday and waiting to verify the documents that was being presented for the bail? Sometimes, let us not belittle our intelligence that he was about getting the bail but someone had filed an application for variation so it frustrated the process. Why are we playing politics with someone’s liberty?”
