In what seems to be an unending legal feud, former Sanitation Minister Cecilia Abena Dapaah has taken legal action against the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP).
Dapaah has filed an injunction application, seeking to halt her prosecution until the freeze on her accounts and cash seizure case is resolved.
In the court documents filed on Tuesday, Madam Dapaah’s lawyers argued that if the OSP is not restrained, their client will suffer irreparable damage. They have requested the court to consider balancing her rights with the state’s power to combat corruption. The lawyers state, “This Court is enjoined to balance the economic right of the affected persons against the State’s power to fight corruption.” They further emphasize that Dapaah would face significant harm if the OSP is not restrained pending the final determination of the case.
Additionally, the embattled former minister has denied allegations made by the Office of the Special Prosecutor that she is involved in an undisclosed real estate business.
She contends that the OSP has failed to provide any evidence to support this claim. Court documents filed by the OSP accused Madam Dapaah of engaging in undisclosed and undeclared real estate transactions, using aliases to conceal her involvement and receiving proceeds from these transactions in her bank account and investments. This forms part of the OSP’s efforts to confirm the seizure of suspected tainted properties belonging to Dapaah.
The Office of the Special Prosecutor has charged Dapaah for failing to declare her income and property, as required by the OSP Act. The statement of offence filed at the High Court on Friday, October 6, alleges that Dapaah failed to comply with a notice to declare her property within 30 days, as stipulated in the OSP Act. The OSP argues that this contravenes the law and that Dapaah should face punishment for her actions.
The legal battle between the Special Prosecutor and Cecilia Dapaah continues to escalate, with both parties presenting their arguments and counterclaims. As the court proceedings unfold, it remains to be seen how this tug-of-war will ultimately be resolved.