Martin Amidu
Former Attorney General Martin Alamisi B.K. Amidu has presented evidence that may adversely affect claims by state officials that African Automobile Limited (AAL) has a binding contract with government regarding some imported Gallopers.
Mr Amidu said pro forma invoice could never stand as a basis for contract as decided in a Supreme Court ruling against the same automobile company, AAL.
On June 6, 2012, the Supreme Court ruled against AAL for presenting documents that did not stand as valid contract documents in law.
Similarly, in the current case of AAL’s $1.5billion claims against the State for Hyundai Gallopers, government officials are negotiating an out-of-court settlement using a Pro Forma invoice and a consent letter written by the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development in 2000 as the basis of the contract.
Even though nobody had been able to present authentically signed contract documents, Ghana had already been exposed to liabilities, according to NDC government officials and spokespersons.
However, Mr. Amidu, who has become a citizen vigilante, said the validity of these documents should be determined by the Supreme Court, the same way it pronounced on the June 6 case where AAL was using unapproved documents to claim compound interest on a deal it engaged in with the government.
Jihad Hijaz, AAL Director
In AAL’s civil appeal case numbered J4/23/2012 and quoted as African Automobile Limited vs. The Attorney-General on June 6, 2012, the Supreme Court dismissed AAL’s appeal for the enforcement of an agreement to be paid compound interest on the grounds that two documents constituted a contract between AAL and the government.
Referring to the case, Mr. Amidu, said it was only the court that could determine whether certain documents between two parties constituted a contract or not.
A Deputy Minister of Information, Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, two weeks ago, broke the news that the government was on the verge of incurring a judgment debt of $1.5 billion following the abrogation of a 1999 contract of AAL by the Kufuor government for the supply of 110 Hyundai Galloper II vehicles for the Local Government Ministry, headed by Kwamena Ahwoi at the time.
Officials of the Kufuor administration have gone public justifying the abrogation because they claimed the arrangement for the Hyundai Gallopers were done under questionable circumstances and not written contract, even though half of the payments had been made to the company.
A string of heated exchanges and legal battles ensued between the Kufuor government and AAL, between 2000 and 2005.
But for an unknown reason, the tussle stalled until the Mills-led National Democratic Congress (NDC) assumed power in 2009 when the case was revived in 2010.
By 2011, the Mills government had withdrawn the legal battle from the court for an out-of-court settlement.
Martin Amidu believed that the withdrawal of the case in July 2011 was done surreptitiously by officials of the Attorney General’s department.
The rotten Hyundai Gallopers in another gargantuan ‘Woyomegate’
“I have been shocked and amazed because if in July 2011 the Attorney-General had a defence and counter-claim in the suit, the only person who could have given express authority for the Attorney-General’s office to accept any offer to hold the case in abeyance to attempt an out-of-court settlement was myself, the Attorney-General at the time.
“In my unavoidable absence for whatever reasons, the President had to specifically appoint in writing another Minister to double as Minister of Justice (not as Attorney-General) to act in my place with a copy of the letter to me to enable me hand over to that Minister,” he stated.
“Neither the Deputy Attorney-General, Hon. Barton Odro, MP, who took liberties for claiming to hail from Cape Coast with the President of the Republic nor the Solicitor-General, Mrs. Amma Gaisie had the constitutional authority under Article 88 to make such an important and critical decision which could cost millions of Ghana Cedis to the Republic without my expressed concurrence and in writing.
“I make bold to say that not even the President who appointed me as the Attorney-General could, under Article 88 of the Constitution, delegate my constitutional functions as the Attorney-General to any other person or authority without first relieving me of my appointment by express revocation of my warrant of appointment.
“This is why I state unequivocally that any decision by anybody to hold in abeyance the conduct of the case between African Automobile Limited Vs. the Attorney-General in July 2011 which was not made by me, as the Attorney-General, was unconstitutional, fraudulent, null and void as contravening Article 1(2) of the Constitution. It could only have been intended to promote some self serving purpose by the person or persons who took the decision in violation of Article 88 of the Constitution particularly, sub-clause (5) thereof,” he charged.
Mr. Amidu, who was relieved of his appointment over the Woyome payments, emphasized that the determination of the legitimacy of the Galloper deal should be taken back to the courts for final determination instead of the obscure negotiations being brokered between governments and AAL.
The country went ballistic when Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa announced in the Daily Graphic that government risked paying a liability of $1.5billion for breach of contract on the delivery of about 110 Galloper II wagons.
But critics and members of the opposition NPP have questioned the basis of the claims, citing the Mills government for deploying the Woyome-like strategy to fleece the national coffers in the name of phantom judgment debts.
“There seems to be an increasing pattern on the part of the NDC government to be too happy to settle. A lot of the cases that are coming up show that pattern. Woyome is a classic example, Waterville etc. It is a worrying trend,” noted Nana Akomea, the Director of Communications for the NPP.
By Raphael Adeniran
