The High Court has approved the request by former Sanitation Minister, Cecilia Dapaah for an expedited hearing of the case about the seizure of her money and the freezing of her bank accounts.
The case has therefore been moved from October 18 to tomorrow October 12.
The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) filed an application seeking the permission of the court to continue to seize an amount of money found at the residence of Cecilia Dapaah and her husband as we as freezing her bank accounts.
Ms Dapaah subsequently filed an application pleading with the court to hear the case earlier.
The lawyers of Cecilia Dapaah and her husband had argued that the application to abridge the time for the hearing of the case is premised on grounds that the delay in hearing the matter is ‘causing undue hardships to the respondents’ and the application for confirmation is a repeat application hence the Office of the Special Prosecutor will not be “prejudiced by the granting of their application to abridge time.”
Lawyers from the OSP however opposed the application claiming that Cecilia Dapaah and her husband are seeking to prevent them from “responding to their affidavit in opposition to the substantive application for confirmation of freezing and seizure orders.”
Lawyers of Cecilia Dapaah led by Victoria Barth said the application for the abridgement of time is further grounded by the failure of the OSP to serve the confirmation application on them earlier.
According to the lawyers, even though their client served notice of her decision to waive her right to personal service to the application filed on September 5, it was not served on them until September 20.
But lawyers from the Special Prosecutor’s office argued that the said request was irregular as their process is “an originating notice on motion which is a process that requires personal service.”
But Cecilia Dapaah’s lawyers opposed this view saying “It cannot be correct that a party is not entitled to waive personal service of a process and to say I have instructed a lawyer to receive on my behalf.”
Cecilia Dapaah also grounds this application on an assertion that the confirmation application filed on September 5 is a repeat of an application that was dismissed on August 31.
According to her lawyers, “On August 8, 2023, the respondent filed an application for the same reliefs as those in their application with the return date of October 18. That earlier application was premised on the same events and information which they seek to rely upon in the second application and that is why I call it a repeat application.”
However, the anti-graft body said this view is based on a misconception.
Lawyers for the OSP indicated that “The substantive application is a fresh process unfettered by any prior considerations. This application is originating from events of September 5 and not on July 24.”
The court upon considering these arguments granted the application with slight modification for the confirmation application to be heard on Thursday, October 12 rather than on the proposed October 18 day.
Justice Eric Twum considered it to be unfair the timelines for the re-seizure and re-freezing and the return date selected.
The OSP re-seized the money on September 5, 2023, but made the application six days later that is September 11.
The process was not served on Cecilia Dapaah and her husband until September 20. The OSP’s team however selected a return date of October 18, more than a month after the processes were filed.
The Judge in making a determination noted that the further delay of hearing the matter would be “inimical to the welfare of the applicants (Cecilia Dapaah and her husband).”
He thus granted the application for the confirmation application to be moved to October 12 in view of fairness and expeditious trial.
Source: Citinewsroom
