The Attorney General is challenging Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson's application for a mistrial in the ongoing ambulance case.

According to the motion filed on May 31, the AG's Office told the High Court that the request is unconstitutional, unfounded, and without merit.

Last week, Dr Cassiel Ato Forson, the first accused person in the ongoing ambulance procurement trial, applied for a mistrial.

He cited recent developments involving a leaked telephone conversation between the third accused in the case, Richard Jakpa and Attorney-General, Godfred Dame.

• Read also: Ato Forson files application for mistrial in ambulance procurement case

A mistrial occurs when a jury is unable to reach a verdict and there must be a new trial with a new jury; or there is a serious procedural error or misconduct that would result in an unfair trial, and the judge adjourns the case without a decision on the merits and awards a new trial.

In his affidavit filed on Friday, May 31, Dr Ato Forson highlighted concerns regarding the leaked tape, which he believes demonstrates professional misconduct on the part of the AG.

These recordings have been submitted and annexed to the filed application.

But in the fresh motion, the AG's office insisted that these form part of attempts by the accused persons to evade justice.

In the application, the AG insisted that "clearly, the accused persons are bent on using any means necessary to get away with crimes committed against the Republic and must not be aided in that illegitimate endeavour through a grant of the instant application."

In the motion, the AG further explained that "the evidence led so far by the 3rd accused person both in his copious and voluminous witness statement and oral evidence in chief, does not show any manipulation by the Attorney-General on basis of which it can be said that the 3rd accused provided suborned testimony."

The AG's office added that the prosecution has been transparent to the court in proceeding so far and must continue despite what it describes as fabricated allegations by the "3rd accused aimed at assisting the applicant to gain unwarranted advantage in this trial."