The trial of two national leaders of the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC), Samuel Ofosu Ampofo and Anthony Kwaku Boahen started with a bombshell when a prosecution witness, Benjamin Osei Ampofo Adjei, a journalist with Accra-based Adom FM, denied knowledge of his witness statement last Wednesday , MyNewsGh.com reports.
The broadcaster who was the first prosecution witness after
taking the stand at the Accra High Court to testify denied knowledge of a
statement that bore his signature and which was crucial to the prosecution’s
He said to the Court “My Lord, this is the first time I’m
seeing this witness statement, it’s my signature but I don’t know what it
This according to a seasoned Media Practitioner, Kojo Marfo beats logical reasoning and cast a dent on the media fraternity and the brand he prides himself with.
Kojo Marfo questioned on Kumasi-based Pure FM monitored by
MyNewsGh.com if indeed, Benjamin Osei Ampofo Adjei is a journalist as he says.
“Kwame, are you sure the guy is a journalist as he claims to
This is bad. No rational person will append his signature on
a statement he has no knowledge of let alone to talk of the person being a
journalist. This is bad. His comments make true of the assertion by a section
of the Ghanaian public that media personnel in Ghana do not read and are not
brilliant enough for the profession.
He should come again Kwame.” He told Kwame Adinkra on the
station’s popular ‘Pure Morning Drive’.
Ofosu Ampofo, the National Chairman of the NDC, and Kwaku Boahen,
a Deputy Communications Officer of the party, are standing trial over a leaked
tape in which they were allegedly heard inciting violence against the
leadership of the Electoral Commission (EC) and the National Peace Council
The witness, a Multimedia journalist became a liability to
the prosecution when he denied knowledge of a statement that bore his
Below are the exchanges that went on in court yesterday
among Adjei, the prosecution witness; the lead prosecutor, Mrs Yvonne Atakora
Obuobisa, who is also the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), and Justice
Samuel Asiedu, the presiding judge.
DPP: Take a look at this witness statement. Can you identify
the signature on it?
Adjei: The signature is mine, but this is the first time I
am seeing this statement.
Justice Asiedu: If the signature on the statement is yours,
how come this is the first time you are seeing this statement?
After the denial by the witness, the DPP sought to tender
the statement into evidence, but that was objected to by Mr Tony Lithur, lawyer
for Ofosu Ampofo, and Dr Basit Aziz Bamba, counsel for Boahen.
In his objection, Mr Lithur argued that per the practice
direction on disclosures, all parties (prosecution and defence) must agree
before a witness statement could be tendered as evidence.
According to him, the defense had not agreed for the
statement to be tendered because the witness had denied knowledge of it.
In response, Mrs Obuobisa refuted the argument by the defense
and submitted that the rule of admissibility of a witness statement required a
witness statement to be dated and signed or thump-printed by the witness.
According to her, the statement was dated May 3, 2019, had
been duly signed by the witness and, therefore, it must be admitted into
On claims by the witness that he did not author the
statement but that it was brought to him to sign, the DPP said Adjei gave a
statement to the police on March 25, 2019 and it was that statement which was
turned into a witness statement which he duly signed.
“Once he has signed it and it was prepared from his police
statement, it must be adopted as evidence,” the DPP argued.
In his ruling, Justice Asiedu agreed with the prosecution and held that so far as the statement contained the signature of the witness, it must be adopted as evidence.
“To the extent that the witness has identified his signature
on the statement, the statement is valid and acceptable,” Justice Asiedu ruled.
Source: MyNewsGh.com/ Evans Osei-Bonsu/ 2020