<<Print>>

The highly-anticipated explosive banter that most members of the public had expected following the decision by businessman Alfred Agbesi Woyome to finally appear before the Public Accounts Committee to explain circumstances under which he was paid GHC51m judgement debt in 2010, failed to happen. But there were a few notable incidents nonetheless. The businessman refused to give any evidence on the controversial judgement debt payment and opted to clam his mouth shut, thus forcing the Chairman of the PAC, Hon Kan Dapaah to adjourn hearing and to also discharge Mr. Woyome and Officers from the Attorney Generals Department and the Ministry of Finance. As expected, the conference hall at the New Block of Parliament, where the PAC had been sitting to consider the 2010 Auditor-General�s report on the Consolidated Fund, was packed to capacity when Mr Woyome finally made his historic appearance before the committee. Moments after the committee members introduced themselves, Counsel for the embattled businessman stressed that they have preliminary issues and until those issues are raised, his client will not want to swear the oath. After being given the leeway, Mr Woyome's counsel, who stated that there is evidence that the cabinet of the previous government truncated a contract it had with Mr. Woyome, however added that whether it was lawful or otherwise remained to be seen. He pointed out that since the Chairman, Hon Kan Dapaah and another committee member, Hon Hackman Owusu Agyeman were members of that cabinet, he believed a likelihood of bias could occur. He also argued that the issues about to be discussed are being reviewed by other bodies and pending before Court and therefore subjudice. After his submission, the Deputy Attorney-General, Mr Gyambibi, on the instruction of the A-G, Benjamin Kunbuor, requested permission from the Chair to address the committee. According to him, it will not be appropriate for his outfit to discuss the subject under review other than in the courts, and so will not say anything about the Woyome case lest they risk being in contempt of the courts. In buttressing his point, the Deputy A-G quoted from the 1992 constitution, Article 137 clause 2, which states inter alia; "that neither the president nor parliament nor anyone acting under their authorities nor any other person whatsoever shall interfere with judges, judicial officers, or other persons exercising judicial power in the exercise of their judicial functions and all organs and agencies of the state shall accord to the courts such assistance as the courts may reasonably require to protect the independence, dignity, and effectiveness of the courts". This provision, he added, makes it clear that when a matter is before a court, that same matter should not be sent or discussed anywhere else or it will be in contempt of the court. After his address, other members of the committee including John Tia, sided with the deputy A-G's advice and urged that sitting be suspended.