Former Tamale Central MP and lawyer, Inusah Fuseini, has criticised the prosecution’s handling of the criminal case against former Chief Executive Officer of the Microfinance and Small Loans Centre (MASLOC), Sedina Tamakloe-Attionu, arguing that the case appeared to prioritise securing a conviction over ensuring justice.
His comments follow the Court of Appeal’s decision to overturn Ms Tamakloe-Attionu’s conviction and 10-year prison sentence, resulting in her acquittal and discharge.
Speaking on Channel One TV’s The Point of View, Mr Fuseini said the prosecution failed to properly consider evidence that could have supported Ms Tamakloe-Attionu’s defence, despite being aware of it.
He cited the issue of funds released for victims of the Kantamanto Market fire, saying an investigative report had established that the money had been paid, while an audit conducted by Baffour Awuah and Co had also cleared the transaction.
“What is really disturbing in this case is that in two instances there were exculpatory evidence for Sedina. One is the Kantamanto Fire Disaster. The investigator produced a report and indicated in the report that his investigations had established that the money had been paid out. Baffour Awuah and Co had done an audit on Sedina’s activities at MASLOC and had cleared the payment,” he said.
Mr Fuseini further argued that Ms Tamakloe-Attionu’s successor at MASLOC testified that the matter was no longer being pursued.
“The successor of Sedina gave evidence in court and said that they were no longer pursuing the Kantamanto Market Fire case. These were the words Dr. Stephen Amoah used in court. But prosecution went ahead, charged her with the offence, and then the court convicted her on the offence in which evidence had been provided,” he stated.
He said these circumstances raised concerns about the prosecution’s approach to the case.
“You see that the prosecution in the Sedina case at the High Court appeared to be more interested in conviction rather than justice,” he said.
Mr Fuseini also questioned Ms Tamakloe-Attionu’s conviction over the procurement of vehicles, arguing that the contract was renegotiated by her successor after she had left office. He maintained that the revised agreement should not have been used as a basis for holding her criminally liable.
He further raised concerns about the issue of ex gratia payments, saying evidence from a prosecution witness indicated that payments made to Ms Tamakloe-Attionu and her deputy had been authorised by the Finance Director based on their conditions of service.
The Court of Appeal had earlier held that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt before overturning Ms Tamakloe-Attionu’s conviction.
Source:Fiilafmonline/CitiNews
