Former Attorney-General Martin Amidu has challenged claims by the A-G's Department that it helped him in his fight to retrieve money wrongly paid to Waterville Holdings Ltd. He said it was strange that the A-G's Department which was the 1st defendant in the suit and remained so till judgment was now claiming to have helped him (plaintiff) in the case. Read below the full statement issued exclusively to Joy News by Mr Amidu. Well, why are we fighting over who takes credit for a judgment in vindication of the Constitution? The important thing is that the judgment was given pursuant to an action by the plaintiff in the public interest. The AG was 1st Defendant and remained so till judgment. The office of the AG would not be helping or supporting the plaintiff if they admitted the plaintiff's claim because they did not have a defence to his claim. Waterville was wrongly paid by an Attorney General who instead of protecting the Republic chose to unconstitutionally arbitrate and paid 25m euro to them. What prevented the AG from taking the position I took. They never pursued Waterville for a refund of that money in any court, so how can the AG now say she supported me in my action. Did the AG draft my writ and Statement of Case in the Waterville/Woyome, and Isofoton cases for me? Did the AG's office conduct research for me to write my writ, statement of case, and legal submissions? Did the AG pay my filing fees for the two cases? Did not the AG have to ask for leave out of time to file its defence in the two cases when I was ready for the hearing? Was it not the Plaintiff who as Attorney General amended the Writ and Statement of Claim at the High Court to plead fraud for the first time and rewrite the whole case now pending in that Court? Were the hands of the succeeding AG's not tied by the pleadings the plaintiff in the two cases left behind when he left office. The amendments were purposefully initiated in anticipation of the fact that I was on my way out. Did the plaintiff not go to the Supreme Court precisely because after he left office the AG's were trying to compromise the cases? How then do you help a plaintiff only when you are failing the people and he decides to sue you in the Supreme Court for the people's money at his own expense? I am sad that a Government supported by my own political party is spinning even a simple and glaring case. I do not want any credit for the Supreme Court’s decision. The Constitution of Ghana has won. The people of Ghana who are sovereign have won. I am not interested in any glories or who must take credit. Who is Martin Amidu if the people of Ghana did not fund his education? Who is Martin Amidu if the people of Ghana did not give him an opportunity to serve this nation and particularly as Deputy Attorney General for several years and also as Attorney General? I claim nothing from the people of Ghana but to use the knowledge they gave me to serve them. I have purposefully decided to stay out of the public eye because I do not want the judgment won by the people of Ghana to be about me. The Government can take all the credit. I do not mind. My satisfaction is that the Court has ordered the refund of all monies paid to Waterville to the Republic. The Attorney General will serve the people well if instead of claiming to have won the cases she concentrated in ensuring that every pesewa is returned as order by the Court. Who cares who did what? The Deputy Attorney General will do well to read Attorney General vs. Balkan Energy (Ghana) Limited and tell the public whom the Supreme Court selected for praise for excellent submissions in saving the state from a similar situation where the amount involved when calculated with interest would have been double the Waterville judgment debt? Did Martin Amidu make noise about it? I am shy of praises that is why I have refused to talk to the press or be seen in public. Leave me alone!" the statement concluded. When contacted for his reaction to Mr. Amidu's statement, the Deputy A-G, Dr. Dominic Ayine, who signed the A-G Department's statement said, "I think it is a petty reaction to rather serious matters. I will decline the interview."