During the ambulance procurement trial, Richard Jakpa, identified as the third defendant, openly criticized the Attorney-General, Godfred Dame, labeling him as “evil and lacking character.” This accusation unfolded in the High Court in Accra, capturing significant public and legal attention.
Jakpa, who appeared visibly upset during his testimony, conveyed to the court how he had shared his grievances regarding Dame’s actions with Supreme Court Justice Yonny Kulendi. He portrayed the Attorney-General’s actions towards him as driven by malicious intent and devoid of ethical considerations, adding a personal and intense layer to the ongoing legal proceedings.
Expressing his frustration, Jakpa detailed his attempts to seek counsel and support from Justice Kulendi, someone he trusted, due to what he perceived as Dame’s unjust use of authority against him. He described his outreach to the Justice as a desperate measure, driven by his search for a fair resolution and his disillusionment with the legal challenges he was facing.
Jakpa’s allegations came to light during a heated cross-examination led by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Yvonne Atakora Obuobisa. She probed Jakpa’s motives and questioned the appropriateness of his approach, highlighting the unconventional nature of seeking direct intervention from a Supreme Court Justice instead of following standard legal protocols. The DPP’s inquiries suggested skepticism about Jakpa’s methods and the validity of his claims.
Defending his actions, Jakpa reiterated his conviction that the severity of the Attorney-General’s conduct justified his direct appeal to Justice Kulendi. He emphasized that his decision was spurred by an urgent need to address what he believed to be a deeply personal vendetta rather than a legitimate legal pursuit.
Presiding over the trial, Justice Afia Serwaa Asare-Botwe acknowledged the serious nature of the allegations brought by Jakpa. She indicated that the court would carefully consider these accusations in the broader context of the case, underscoring the potential impact of Jakpa’s claims on the trial’s outcome.
As the trial progresses, it continues to draw significant public interest due to the testimonies and the high stakes involved. The court’s ultimate decision is anticipated to have profound implications for the parties involved and potentially for broader legal and governmental accountability in the region.
