The Criminal Division of the High Court in Accra has thrown out two key witness statements presented by the prosecution. These statements were intended to be used in the trial of former Chief Executive Officer of the National Food and Buffer Stock Company Limited (NAFCO), Hanan Abdul-Wahab Aludiba, and four other individuals. The court made this decision on April 29, 2026.
Justice Francis Achibonga, a judge from the Court of Appeal sitting on the case, delivered the ruling. This decision came after a strong objection from the legal team representing the first accused individual. They argued that the prosecution had already submitted witness statements for these same individuals. These earlier statements had already been officially accepted during the case management stage. The defence stated that introducing new statements without the court's permission was improper and against the rules for handling criminal cases.
This trial is connected to the management of public funds and resources within the National Food and Buffer Stock Company. NAFCO plays a crucial role in Ghana's agricultural sector. It ensures food security by managing buffer stocks of essential food commodities. Such trials often involve substantial sums of money and public trust. The financial implications of mismanagement or corruption at NAFCO can affect food prices and agricultural stability for millions of Ghanaians. This case highlights the judicial system's role in ensuring accountability in public institutions, particularly those responsible for national food security.
The defence argued that the new documents were unclear. It was not possible to tell if they were amendments, replacements, or entirely new statements. Citing specific court rules, they contended that the prosecution needed to get explicit permission before filing such documents. They also had to prove that the new information was not available earlier. The defence urged the court to dismiss the statements as they were filed incorrectly. Counsel for the second accused person also supported this position.
When the court asked the prosecution to explain their actions, they could not provide legal backing for the new witness statements. They requested more time to fix the process. However, the court sided with the defence. It ruled that the two statements were unlawfully filed and therefore struck them out. The case has been postponed to May 5, 2026, for it to continue. This development could force the prosecution to rethink its strategy and evidence presentation.