The Attorney General on Monday 20 January 2020 exhibited a letter that may have left gaping holes in the evidence of two key prosecution witnesses.
The letter was an original application letter put in by the defunct Ejura based Obaatanpa microfinance for a facility of 1 million cedis in 2016.
The letter may be important because two prosecution witnesses had earlier claimed that the GHC500,000 facility that is in contention was not granted on the basis of the application of Obaatanpa micro-finance.
The two prosecution witnesses, a former board member of Obaatanpa microfinance Samuel Quansah and his board chair Seth Asiedu Obugyei in their evidence claimed the GHC500,000 was an investment and had no link with their request for a facility of 1 million cedis.
The evidence of the two men is however sharply contradicted by the minutes on the request letter which was introduced by the prosecution.
On the letter are minutes that showed that the money was approved by the former Chief Executive of MASLOC Sedina Tamakloe in response to the request.
The approval according to the Head of Finance of MASLOC Francis Bandoh was granted after discussions between himself and the former MASLOC Boss.
He told the court Sedina Tamakloe minuted the request to him for discussions upon receiving it.
Francis Bandoh said the discussions led to him recommending that some money be lodged with the defunct Microfinance Company which resulted in the CEO approving GHC500,000 for the company.
The former Board member and his Chairperson had argued strenuously that management of the company rejected the money because of the interest rate.
The former board Chair and owner of Obaatanpa microfinance Seth Asiedu Obugyei said the management of the company found the 2% monthly interest rate too high.
Even though Obaatanpa had accepted an earlier facility of GHC15,000 at the same interest rate, Seth Asiedu Obugyei said the management turned down the GHC500,000 because it was an investment and it felt the interest payable should be lower than the one charged on a facility.
The AG’s evidence however showed that the money in question was never an investment but facility.
This leaves the AG with the word of the two men as reliable evidence to justify the alleged return of the said money.
Source: radiogoldlive.com/Sena Nombo
