… Chief Justice’ Lawyer In US$5million Bribe Allegation Features.
A resounding double-take by a sitting High Court judge on his own ruling is
threatening to reopen the debate about the credibility of the judiciary.
The Judge, Justice Jerome Noble Nkrumah a High Court judge had ruled on a case
six years ago and had overturned his own ruling this year on the same case without
recourse to the rules of engagement where the only way a ruling by a judge can be
overturned is true either an appeal or the judge discovered he was defrauded at the
time of making the ruling.
The case involves an arbitration tussle between the National Investment Bank (NIB)
and Eland International Company which had a local subsidiary.
Justice Nkrumah, on February 19, 2016, had ruled that conclusively that the two
litigants be referred to arbitration in the London Arbitration court as captured in the
agreement between the two.
But on 22nd March 2021, the same judge, presiding over the same court, ruled that
the 2016 ruling was a mistake and therefore it is revoked.
Whatsup News gathered that NIB was confident of its case in the arbitration, but it
suddenly realised that the representatives of Eland had gotten hold of sensitive
documents that will likely nail NIB in the arbitration court, hence the quick “legal
gymnastics” that led to the suspicious recantation by Justice Nkrumah of a case he
had ruled on more than five years ago.
Noticeable in the legal anomaly is lawyer Yaw Oppong, who is a legal counsel for
Chief Justice Kwasi Anin-Yeboah who was recently accused of collecting some US$
5 million bribe to undertake “legal gymnastics” for a litigant.
Yaw Oppong represents the flip-flopping ruling issued by Justice Noble Nkrumah.
This has gotten eyebrows raised within circles of critics who suspect a circle of rogue
dealings in the judiciary spearheaded by some known names.
Reliable sources tell Whatsup News that the realisation of the implicating documents
in the possession of Eland International had forced NIB into desperation to have the
court injunct the arbitration proceedings.
Eland has since headed for the Supreme Court to secure a Certiorari ruling to quash
the new questionable ruling by Justice Jerome Nkrumah.
If Eland Succeeds with the restraining order of the supreme court it would mean that
NIB will have no choice but to face the arbitration court in London in a case that
promises to spark fireworks.
Eland International Company Vs National Investment Bank (with Eland International Ghana
as the third party)’ arose when a collateral management agreement (CMA) between Eland
International and its local subsidiary, Eland Ghana with the NIB run into problems
culminating into gargantuan scandal in which the former MD of the National Investment
Bank, Daniel Gyimah stars.
The collateral management agreement and it attending memorandum of understanding
(MOU) entails Eland international supplying goods from abroad to warehouses manned by
the NIB for sale in Ghana. According to information, a dispute arose over NIB not so
accurate accounting for the supplies that were made to the warehouses.
Several breaches of the CMA, including forgery of signatures, stealing of moneys from
escrow deposit accounts belonging to the parties were alleged on the parts of the NIB’s
Daniel Gyimah and gangs.
Providentially, a 2004 document covering the agreement between the parties had
included a clause which had provided for any dispute that might arise to be sent to
arbitration in London (the United Kingdom. And so when a dispute arose, Eland went
to court in Ghana to enforce the clause in question.
For some inexplicable reason, the NIB fought the quest by Eland to have the issue
go for arbitration in the UK. In 2016, the bank, argued intensely before Justice
Jerome Noble Nkrumah that the couching of clause 6 was amorphous and did not
bind the parties to arbitration over the dispute.
According to the bank, the vagueness in the clause lay in the fact that it did not
specify any appointing authority before whom the arbitration was to be held.
However, His Lordship Justice Jerome had dismissed NIB’s argument and ruled for
the case to go to arbitration as provided for by clause 6.
However, some five years after that ruling, on March 22, March 2021, the same
judge ruled on the case again claiming that his earlier pronouncement was a mistake
and revokes it.
Adjudication leading to the revocation of the court’s judgment had been instigated by the
NIB, which had returned to the court claiming that in its original pleadings before the 2016
ruling, it had neglected to indicate fraud on the part of Eland. The bank had then gone on to
argue that fraud was not a subject of arbitration.
Eland has argued the fraud that the NIB is accusing it of did not happen and that even if it
did, then it can be dealt with at arbitration since the UK legal system deems fraud arbitrable.
Eland has argued the fraud that the NIB is accusing it of did not happen and that
even if it did, then it can be dealt with at arbitration.
However, Justice Noble Nkrumah sided with the NIB and therefore revoked the
ruling in what has become curious precedence that fuels speculations that Lawyer
Yaw Oppong may be using his strong connections in the judiciary to undertake the
infamous legal gymnastics to favour NIB.
The development has got observers wondering amidst serious accusations of bribery
and corruption within the Ghanaians judiciary.
Whatsup News is on the trail of the developments in the case and would keep readers update.