Sky Train trial: Supreme Court dismisses former GIIF CEO’s certiorari application

The Supreme Court has dismissed an application by the first accused in the $2 million SkyTrain case, Solomon Asamoah, seeking to quash decisions by the trial court over allegations that the judge exceeded her jurisdiction and made findings that could prejudice his defence.

The court, presided over by Justice Gabriel Pwamang, with Justices Samuel Asiedu, Hafisata Amaleboba, Sophia Bernasco-Esaah and Anthony Forson as members, held that the application ought to fail.

It consequently refused the applications for certiorari and prohibition.

Alleged excesses

Moving the application in court Wednesday (October 14), counsel for Asamoah, Prince Asafo-Agyei, said the application, filed on August 21, 2026, challenged the ruling of the High Court on July 2, 2026, dismissing the accused person’s submission of no case to answer.

He argued that the trial judge exceeded her jurisdiction by making definitive findings on whether the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence to warrant a conviction at that stage of the proceedings.

According to him, the judge went beyond the scope of her powers by making findings that should not have been made when determining a submission of no case to answer.

Counsel further argued that the judge, on July 30, 2026, reviewed the applicant’s bail conditions while dealing with an application for stay of proceedings, without giving him an opportunity to respond.

He took particular exception to the judge’s alleged statement that the applicant was “the direct cause of the loss”, arguing that it went beyond what the court was required to determine at that stage and could prejudice the defence.

Bail conditions

Mr Asafo-Agyei also challenged the trial court’s decision to revert the applicant’s bail conditions to a requirement to report monthly until the end of the trial.

He said the applicant was neither given notice nor heard before the decision was taken, adding that there was no application before the court seeking a variation of the bail conditions.

Counsel submitted that the cumulative effect of the judge’s findings, the alteration of the bail conditions and what he described as off-record proceedings on July 2, 2026, created a reasonable apprehension that his client would not receive an impartial hearing.

**Opposed **

Opposing the application, the Deputy Attorney-General, Dr Justice Srem-Sai, said the complaint about the bail conditions was unfounded.

He explained that the accused person had applied for a variation of his bail conditions on February 9, 2026, and that the variation was subject to the continuation of the trial.

He said when the period covered by the variation ended, the trial judge merely reverted to the original conditions.

“We do not see any injustice in this case,” he said.

On the allegation that the trial judge had exceeded her jurisdiction, Dr Srem-Sai argued that the applicant’s case was based on a misapprehension of the elements of the offence.

He further submitted that the allegations underpinning the application for prohibition were unfounded and did not establish any element of bias.

Background

Mr Asamoah, a former Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF), and Professor Christopher Ameyaw-Akumfi, a former board chairman of the fund, are standing trial over an alleged $2 million payment connected with the proposed Accra SkyTrain project, which was never constructed.

The prosecution alleges that the money was transferred from GIIF’s account to Africa Investor Holdings Limited, a South African company, without the requisite approval of the GIIF board.

The two accused persons have pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Also read:

• Sky Train trial: $2m loss was caused by Covid-19, defence lawyers argue

• GIIF’s Investment Committee supported Sky Train project but never recommended approval – Witness