National Communications Officer of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), Sammy Gymafi has commended the trial judge for delivering a detailed judgment in the ongoing ambulance purchase trial involving Minority Leader Dr Cassiel Ato Forson and third accused Richard Jakpa.

However, Mr Gyamafi raised concerns regarding some decisions taken by the judge, which he said the NDC disagrees with.

Speaking on JoyNews’ The Pulse on Thursday, June 6, the NDC Communications Officer said; “As a student of law, as a lawyer interested in the development of the law, I am excited and it is something that we need to encourage.

“Now as to the certain decisions that the trial judge made, which in our opinion were totally wrong because those decisions are not borne out by the law and the fact that were before her,” he said.

His comment comes after the High Court Judge, Justice Afia Serwah Asare-Botwe advised the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Godfred Yeboah Dame, to recuse himself from the ambulance procurement case, citing allegations of professional and prosecutorial misconduct.

Read also: Recuse yourself from ambulance case – Judge advises Attorney General

According to JoyNews' Latif Iddrisu, Mr Dame stood up in an attempt to explain himself, but the judge maintained her stance.

This decision follows separate applications filed by the first accused, Dr Forson, and the third accused, Richard Jakpa.

The applications sought several orders, including an inquiry into the Attorney-General's conduct based on Jakpa's claims that the Attorney-General had been contacting him at odd hours. 

• Read also: AG-Jakpa tape: There’s no basis to allow inquiry into Godfred Dame’s conduct – Judge

But the judge stated that the demand for an inquiry into the Attorney General’s conduct in the ongoing Ambulance case has no basis.

On the back of this, Mr Gyamfi reiterated that the NDC has several disagreements with the judge on some of the decisions taken.

Responding to the issues of mistrial, where the judge said she could not find any law to stand on to pronounce the relief the applicants were seeking, Mr Gyamfi said “It is one of the things we disagreed with the trial judge on.

“We think that the court had the jurisdiction and the power to make an order for mistrial or an order for an inquiry into the conduct of the Attorney-General.”

He argued that under Article 140 of the Constitution, the High Court, subject to the provisions of the Constitution has jurisdiction in all criminal and civil matters.

He stated that when such jurisdiction has been conferred on the High Court unless there is any specific law that expressly ousts the jurisdiction of the court to make orders for mistrial or inquiry, the NDC believes the court has that general jurisdiction.

“You have the jurisdiction in all criminal matters and so in hearing a criminal matter, the court has the responsibility to ensure that these processes are not abused and the rights of the accused persons are respected and the prosecution is done in good faith,” he said.

The NDC Communications Officer added that if matters are put before the court that shows a breach of prosecutorial misconduct on the part of the Attorney General, it should be the matters that the court is interested in, saying that the court is there to do justice.