Hanan Abdul-Wahab Aludiba, the former CEO of the National Food and Buffer Stock Company Limited, and his wife, Faiza Seidu Wuni, were discharged by the court after Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem-Sai withdrew the accusations against them.
The pair entered a not guilty plea to all of the counts against them. They were on trial with others for their alleged involvement in the procurement and distribution of food items under the national school feeding program.
Dr. Srem-Sai told the court that the pair will no longer be prosecuted when the matter was called on Tuesday, May 5.
The charges were later dismissed by the court as withdrawn.
However, the two were detained again soon after being released from custody; the specifics of this most recent event are still unknown.
The accused individuals and their businesses were on trial for allegedly incurring GH¢78 million in losses to the state. The prosecution and defence had been debating procedural concerns in court during the current proceedings.
Principal State Attorney Esi Dentah Yankah informed the court during the prior session that the prosecution had submitted two witness statements on April 24, 2026, but had attempted to replace them with earlier testimonies submitted on December 18, 2025.
Former Attorney-General Godfred Yeboah Dame opposed the request, claiming that the prosecution had violated procedural procedures by submitting fresh witness statements without first requesting permission from the court.
“Clearly, they have not applied for leave and they have not demonstrated why that leave should be granted. They have not indicated the nature of the document they have filed before you,” he argued.
Additionally, Mr. Dame said that “from the process filed it cannot be determined whether it is an amendment to the already filed witness statements or an addition or indeed an entirely new one. This is totally out of order, it is not known to the rules before you.”
Augustines Obour, Mrs. Wuni’s attorney, backed the objection, arguing that the prosecution could not present fresh witness statements after stating that case management had finished.
In a bench decision, Justice Francis Achibonga ruled out the two witness statements for noncompliance with procedural rules, agreeing with the defence.
An objection concerning the involvement of an Assistant Staff Officer from the Economic and Organised Crime Office in the prosecution team was also anticipated to be decided by the court.
The prosecution contended that a public official working on the Attorney General’s authority might present in court without additional authorisation under the Law Officers Act.
Mr. Dame contested that stance, arguing that any such delegation must adhere to the law to the letter.
He contended that “the mere introduction of a person who is not a staff of the Attorney General of the rank specified in the Law Officers Act of 1974 does not amount to a law.”
After that, Justice Achibonga ordered the Attorney-General’s Department to provide proof of approval and temporarily removed the assistant staff officer’s name from the proceedings.
The court was unable to render a decision on the outstanding matters because the charges were dropped.
Source: newsthemegh.com