The Military Secretary, Air Commodore Nana Adu Gyamfi, has confirmed that Richard Jakpa, the businessman standing trial with the Minority Leader for allegedly causing financial loss of €2.37 million to the state in an ambulance deal, was indeed released from the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF).
Jakpa’s release from the GAF, Air Commodore Adu Gyamfi stated, was a “dishonourable release” due to his unsatisfactory conduct and acts of indiscipline.
The Senior Military Officer was testifying at the Accra High Court yesterday, after being subpoenaed by Jakpa to speak to the authenticity of his release report from the GAF, dated September 12, 2007, which was tendered into evidence by the prosecution.
According to him, some of the unsatisfactory conduct and indiscipline exhibited by Jakpa included his failure to return to duty in 2002, after taking part in a promotional examination.
The alleged offences which led to Jakpa’s release from the GAF dominated the Military Secretary’s testimony which was led by counsel for Jakpa, Thaddeus Sory.
Air Commodore Adu Gyamfi told the court that Jakpa was sacked for inefficiency in the discharge of his duties under Article 15 item 2 (a) of the GAF regulations.
This led Mr Sory to ask the military officer what inefficiency under the regulations meant. “Inefficiency means continuous lack of application and interest as stated in the rules,” the military officer answered.
Alleged fraudulent activities
Mr Sory also took issue with the first paragraph of the release report, which accused Jakpa of exhibiting unsatisfactory service, “marked by consistent fraudulent conduct, abrasiveness and general indiscipline.”
Counsel wondered why his client was described in such terms, with no specific offences or allegations levelled against him in relation to the descriptions in the release report. He, therefore, asked Air Commodore Adu Gyamfi what the specific allegations against Jakpa in relation to the alleged fraudulent conduct were.
The military officer answered that a release report, generally, did not contain offences committed by the officer in question. “With release instructions from the armed forces, the system doesn’t capture offences the soldier or officer committed. It is solely the terms and conditions under which the person is going home,” he answered.
However, Air Commodore Adu Gyamfi, explained that the offences and their details were normally captured in a special report prepared by the unit to which the offending officer belonged.
Mr Sory then shifted gear and asked the military officer whether or not Jakpa was served with a copy of the release report. Air Commodore Adu Gyamfi answered that Mr Jakpa was not served with a copy, but further explained that it was not the practice of the GAF to serve offending officers with release reports.
“When we write such reports, we do not copy the officer in question, before such a report would be written about an officer, the officer might have gone through interviews about certain things he or she might have done. So it is upon consistent interviews that this paper is generated,” he said.
Counsel then asked the military officer if that was the case, then there would be evidence of the said interviews, to which the witness answered that such evidence would be with the unit of the officer in question.
Below is what ensued between lawyer Sory and Air Commodore Adu Gyamfi.
Thaddeus Sory: So the report stating that the third accused person is guilty of fraudulent conduct, there will be evidence in your records of the interviews and the processes he went through in respect of this conduct. Is that correct?
Air Commodore Adu Gyamfi: The details of whatever went on will be at the officer’s unit. Then after interviews, the unit will write through a command to the service headquarters before it gets to the General Headquarters.
Cross-examination
During the cross-examination by the Attorney-General (A-G), Godfred Yeboah Dame, Air Commodore Adu Gyamfi confirmed numerous acts of indiscipline against Jakpa during his time as a military officer.
Such acts, he said, included running away from duty, and failure to follow instructions. According to him, numerous interviews by the GAF failed to reform Jakpa, leading to his ultimate release.
Below is what ensued between the Attorney-General and the witness.
A-G: The third accused person was released pursuant to a letter from the Ministry of Defence. Are you aware?
Air Commodore Adu Gyamfi: “Yes, I am aware”.
A-G: “From your testimony so far, would you say the third accused person was honourably released?” Air Commodore Adu Gyamfi: “From the report, he was released but not honourably. If an officer is released honourably, the report would say so.”
CDS testifies
Hearing continues on Tuesday, July 23, this year, where the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), Lieutenant General Thomas Oppong-Peprah, another witness subpoenaed by Jakpa, is expected to testify.
The A-G objected to the CDS testifying, submitting that he was not a material witness. His objection was challenged by Thaddeus Sory, who argued that the A-G’s submission was without any basis.
In the end, the court, presided over by Justice Afia Serwah Asare-Botwe, a Justice of the Court of Appeal, sitting as an additional High Court judge, overruled the objection by the A-G and ordered the CDS to appear in court to testify.
“The third accused is facing serious charges; he must be allowed to adequately prepare his defence,” Justice Asare-Botwe ruled.
Why the subpoena?
The CDS and the Military Secretary were subpoenaed by Jakpa to testify to the authenticity of the release report from the GAF, which was tendered into evidence by the prosecution.
The prosecution decided to tender the release report into evidence to attack the character and credibility of Jakpa after he accused the A-G of trying to influence him (Jakpa) to give false testimony, an allegation which had been vehemently denied by the A-G.
Not guilty
The Minority Leader – Dr Cassiel Ato Forson and Jakpa have been accused of causing a financial loss of €2.37 million to the state in a deal to purchase 200 ambulances for the country between 2014 and 2016.
They have pleaded not guilty to counts of willfully causing financial loss to the state, abetment to willfully causing financial loss to the state, contravention of the Public Procurement Act and intentionally misapplying public property.
Source:theghanareport.com