Ghana’s former Attorney-General, Godfred Dame, has strongly questioned the legality of the recent arrest and detention of Hanan Abdul-Wahab, the former Chief Executive Officer of the National Food Buffer Stock Company (NAFCO). Mr. Dame stated he and Abdul-Wahab’s wife were denied access to his client following the arrest at Kotoka International Airport by officers believed to be from the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI).
Mr. Dame appeared on Channel One TV on Sunday, July 5, to discuss the incident. Officials reportedly told the former Attorney-General that the agency does not operate on weekends, a response he deemed inconsistent given the weekend arrest. He expressed concern, stating, “I was there with Hanan’s wife and we were denied access. I do not know what they are doing to him.”
This incident fits into a broader pattern of legal disputes involving high-profile public officials in Ghana. Such developments often raise questions about due process and legal protections within the justice system. The perceived inconsistency in law enforcement operations, especially concerning weekend activities, can erode public trust in regulatory and investigative bodies.
Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem-Sai claimed Abdul-Wahab’s arrest was linked to an attempt to access funds in a frozen bank account. However, Mr. Dame disputed this claim directly. He argued that no valid freezing order existed at the time of the arrest. The original order had been issued for an earlier criminal case, which the Attorney-General's Office subsequently withdrew.
Mr. Dame explained, “How can one attempt to withdraw money from a frozen account? It is even incorrect to say there is an order freezing the account because that order was granted about a year ago under the earlier arraignment of Hanan before court, and it lapsed when the Attorney-General withdrew all the charges and he was re-arrested.” He emphasized that withdrawing original charges effectively terminated associated court orders. Fresh applications for new orders would be necessary for any new legal proceedings.
The re-arrest of Abdul-Wahab thus initiated a new legal process. This new process would require the prosecution to secure new court orders if it intended to freeze any bank accounts. Mr. Dame criticized the reported failure to do so, asking, “If the Attorney-General desires a fresh freezing order, all they need to do is apply for one. Why doesn’t he want to apply for a fresh freezing order?”
He further criticized the manner of the arrest, drawing parallels to his tenure as Attorney-General. Mr. Dame stated he never authorized similar actions, even in high-profile criminal prosecutions. He mentioned several former public officials, like Dr. Stephen Opuni and Collins Dauda, who traveled with court permission while on trial. He observed, “Never once did I authorise the arrest of any person. Never once did I authorise the curtailment of a person’s right to movement.”
This escalating disagreement between Abdul-Wahab’s legal team and the Attorney-General’s Office is a significant watch point. It highlights concerns regarding the rule of law and the treatment of accused persons. Legal observers will be watching to see if the High Court reviews the Economic and Organised Crime Office's (EOCO) actions and how these legal challenges might impact future high-profile arrests and asset freezes in Ghana.