Court gives accused more time to fill defence in Sky Train case

Two former officials of the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund have been given another opportunity to file their defence processes in the $2 million SkyTrain trial.

The Accra High Court, presided over by Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay, has directed Solomon Asamoah, former Chief Executive Officer of GIIF, and Professor Christopher Ameyaw-Akumfi, former Board Chairman of the fund, to file their witness statements on or before September 23, 2026.

The order was made on Monday, August 24, when the case came up for case management conference.

The two are standing trial over allegations that they conspired to cause financial loss of $2 million to the State in connection with the proposed Accra SkyTrain project.

The project was never constructed.

The prosecution alleges that the accused persons caused the transfer of $2 million from GIIF’s account to Africa Investor Holdings Limited, a South African company, without the required approval for the intended investment.

When the case was called, the court noted that it had not received any defence processes from the accused persons.

Counsel for Mr Asamoah, Prince Asafo-Adjei, who held brief for Victoria Barth, told the court that his client had not filed any process because an application had been filed at the Supreme Court on August 21, 2026, invoking its supervisory jurisdiction.

He also said an interlocutory injunction application had been filed, with a return date of August 27.

Counsel therefore asked the court to adjourn the matter to allow the Supreme Court process to be determined.

For Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi, Godfred Gyimah Okyere, who held brief for Yaw Acheampong Boafo, also said no defence process had been filed.

He told the court that a fresh application for stay of proceedings pending appeal had been filed on August 21, with a return date of September 1.

He also asked for an adjournment.

Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem-Sai opposed the requests.

He said the accused persons had already been directed on July 2 to file their defence processes within 21 days if they intended to open their defence.

According to him, after their earlier stay applications were dismissed on July 30, the court granted them an additional 21 days to comply.

He said that period expired on August 20.

Dr Srem-Sai argued that the new applications filed on August 21 were made after the deadline given by the High Court had already expired.

He submitted that an application invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court does not automatically stay proceedings.

He also argued that neither the interlocutory injunction application nor the fresh stay application prevented the High Court from continuing the case.

The Deputy Attorney-General therefore urged the court not to extend time again.

He asked the court to proceed to convict the accused persons on the basis that they had failed to open their defence after a prima facie case had been established against them.

Justice Kocuvie-Tay held that the processes filed before the Supreme Court did not stop the High Court from proceeding with the trial.

The judge, however, exercised the court’s discretion in favour of the accused persons and granted them more time to file their witness statements, if they wished to do so.

She noted that this was about the third time the court had extended time for them to file their defence processes.

The court directed that the case management conference be held on October 5, 6 and 7, 2026, at 9 a.m. each day.

The case was adjourned to October 5, 2026.