Deputy Attorney General Alfred Tuah-Yeboah has described as unfortunate the declaration of war by the third accused, Richard Jakpa, against the Attorney General, Godfred Yeboah Dame.

During proceedings on June 20, Richard Jakpa said he was angry at the Attorney General because Mr Dame had assured him that he would be released at the no-case submission stage of the trial, only for the AG to disappoint him.

As such, he declared a war on AG at the residence of his cousin, Justice Yonny Kulendi.

The third accused told the court that Mr Dame could go on and use all the legal expertise he had, but he [Jakpa] would resort to underworld powers, and they would see who would survive.

Additionally, Mr Jakpa claimed that Mr Dame had informed him he was merely collateral damage in the ongoing trial and would be acquitted in the end.

Richard Jakpa stated that he did not want to be collateral damage, since he was innocent and that he has lost all his businesses and international networks.

In response to these assertions, Mr Tuah-Yeboah said the declaration of war has put the Attorney General's Department on alert.

"I think it is quite unfortunate, to be frank with you, because that declaration of war, according to him [Jakpa], whether he is acquitted or convicted, he's declared that war. So he has put us on notice, and the needed steps will be taken," he said.

Also, touching on other matters, the Deputy Attorney General said it was an interesting proceeding and declined to give further comment as the case was still unfolding.

“We heard the matter and you make your own judgment out of what you heard, you heard issues about someone operating in the underworld and someone using his legal skills, declaration of war against the Attorney General; all these things came up so interesting proceedings,” he added.

Meanwhile, a member of the opposition party, Felix Kwakye Ofosu said the declaration of war by Richard Jakpa does not hurt the case.

"The point is that Mr Jakpa insisted he has not said anything that hasn't happened. If I have discussions with you and you agree that you will do something and you fail to do it, and I come and say that we agreed you would do this and you did not do it, I have not said anything that is not true.

"If it were the case that Mr Jakpa was saying things that had been proven to be untrue by the court, then you could say that some damage has been done to his reputation. But as of now, as far as he is concerned, he has not said anything that did not happen.

"So whether he was exercising a right of reply or his right to react to what the AG did to him, it is completely immaterial in this regard. What matters is, is he saying the truth? What he is saying, is the AG able to contradict," he said.