The facts of the case are that, sometime in January 2005, the Government of Ghana invited bids for the rehabilitation of the Accra (Ohene Djan) and Kumasi (Baba Yara) Sports stadia and the construction of two more stadia in Sekondi-Takoradi and Tamale. At the end of the bidding process, a number of companies were short listed and invited to submit proposals for the rehabilitation and construction of the stadia. Among these companies was M-powapak Gmb/ Vamed Engineering Gmbh & Co, KG. At the end of the evaluation process, the Finance and Evaluation Committee declared the financial proposals of M-powapak/Vamed engineering as the most responsive and recommended them to the Central Tender Review Board. Before the tender could receive final approval however, the Government of Ghana terminated the process. Meanwhile, in the course of the tender process, Vamed Engineering had assigned its rights and responsibilities to Waterville Holding (BVI) Ltd. After the termination of the tendering process, Waterville, assuming the place of Vamed Engineering, protested against the termination and got the Government of Ghana to enter into an MOU with it to commence rehabilitation works on the Accra and Elwak stadia. The MOU which was signed on the 30th November 2005, required Waterville to engineer the funding for the project on behalf of the Government of Ghana from Bank Austria Creditanstalt AG, guaranteed by the World Bank's multilateral investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA). The company was also supposed to arrange bridge financing. Subsequent to the MOU, Waterville was authorized by the MOES to move to the site and start work pending the signing of a formal contract. On 19th December 2005, Watervil!e engaged M-powapak, led by the accused Alfred Agbesi Woyome to provide it with financial engineering services in respect of the projects. A formal contract for the rehabilitation of the Accra (Ohene Djan) and EI¬Wak stadia was entered into by the government of Ghana and Waterville Holdings (B\/I) limited on the 26th April 2006. However before the contract could become effective the Government of Ghana terminated same due to Waterville’s inability to engineer funding for the project among others as contained in the MOU and which formed a condition precedent to the contract. Waterville, who initially protested against the termination eventually accepted and proceeded to claim monies for initial works done under the MOU. In August 2009 however, the accused person having received all monies due him under the financial engineering services rendered to Waterville, took advantage of the change in Government and falsely represented to Government Officials that the Government owed him money for financial engineering services rendered to it under the contract with Waterville. In his claim to Government Officials, the accused who had no contract whatsoever with the Government, claimed that, as part of the financial engineering services rendered, he had managed to arrange a total amount of €1,106 470,587.00 for the Government of Ghana through the Bank Austria Creditanstalk, out of which amount he claimed he was entitled to 2% as financial engineering fees. Investigations however revealed that, there were no such funds made available for the benefit of the Country by Bank Austria as claimed by the accused. Investigations further revealed that, the accused had no contract whatsoever with the Government to provide any services. That the only arrangement on financial engineering services he had, was with Waterville Holdings Ltd. which services had been fully paid for and acknowledged by him in a termination agreement. Meanwhile, based on these fraudulent misrepresentations, the accused got the government of Ghana to pay him a total amount of GHC51, 283,480.59, thereby willfully and fraudulently causing huge financial losses to the State.