Accra High Court orders Asamoah, Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi to open defence in $2million SkyTrain fraud case

In a significant ruling that compels the former leadership of the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF) to answer to the state’s allegations in detail, the High Court in Accra has ordered Solomon Asamoah and Professor Christopher Ameyaw-Akumfi to formally open their defence in the $2 million SkyTrain project scandal.

Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay delivered the directive on Thursday, dismissing the “submission of no case” filed by the defence team. The ruling means the court has determined that the prosecution has presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case. Consequently, the two accused must now testify, call their own witnesses, and present documentary evidence to counter the charges rather than relying on a mere legal objection to halt the trial.

The Charges and the Accused

Mr. Asamoah, the former Chief Executive Officer of GIIF, and Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi, the former Board Chairman, are facing a total of six criminal counts. Both individuals face joint charges of conspiracy to commit crime—specifically, wilfully causing financial loss to the Republic and intentional dissipation of public funds. Additionally, Mr. Asamoah and the Professor each face separate, individual counts of the same substantive offences.

Both men have pleaded not guilty to all counts on the charge sheet filed by the Attorney-General’s office.

Background: The Unbuilt SkyTrain

The case centres on a proposed Accra SkyTrain—an ambitious elevated light-rail transit system intended to alleviate the capital’s chronic traffic congestion. GIIF was positioned as a potential anchor investor in the project. However, state prosecutors allege that a total of $2 million was unlawfully disbursed from the fund to the project’s Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) despite never receiving the mandatory formal approval of the GIIF Board. Since the railway infrastructure was never constructed, the prosecution asserts that these funds have been irretrievably lost to the state.

The Prosecution’s Evidence

Leading the prosecution, Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem-Sai called three key witnesses to build the state’s case:

· Yaw Odame-Darkwa, a former GIIF board member, testified unequivocally that the full Board never approved the transaction. He clarified that a document presented by Mr. Asamoah—which informed the Board that “following the approval by the board, the sum of $2 million be invested”—was merely an update on a fait accompli, rather than a request for a pre-authorisation.
· Kofi Boakye, a former Board Secretary of GIIF, corroborated Mr. Odame-Darkwa’s testimony, telling the court that the Board did not formally greenlight the $2 million investment.
· Francis Aboagye, an investigator from the National Intelligence Bureau (NIB), presented findings from his probe, which he claimed aligned with the testimonies of the first two witnesses, solidifying the timeline of the unapproved expenditure.

Defence Arguments Dismissed

The defence team, comprising Victoria Barth (for Mr. Asamoah) and Yaw Acheampong Boafo (for Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi), had vigorously argued for the case to be struck out.

Ms. Barth contended that the $2 million was not “dissipated” but constituted a legitimate equity investment in exchange for a 10 per cent stake in the project’s SPV. She pointed to board minutes dated October 24, 2018, which she argued documented an approval that no one contemporaneously challenged. She further argued that because the funds were converted into shares—a retrievable asset—there was no net financial loss to the state, and any delay in the project’s commencement was caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, which severed the causal link to her client’s conduct.

Similarly, Mr. Boafo argued that the prosecution had not properly charged his client under the relevant legal provisions and that intense cross-examination had so discredited the state’s witnesses that no reasonable tribunal could convict on such evidence.

However, Justice Kocuvie-Tay found these submissions insufficient to quash the proceedings at this stage. She ruled that the prosecution had crossed the legal threshold required to compel a defence.

What Happens Next

With the court’s directive, the trial now transitions to the defence phase. Mr. Asamoah and Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi are required to take the witness stand—should they choose to do so—or lead evidence to challenge the prosecution’s narrative. The ruling ensures that the accused cannot simply walk away from the charges based on legal technicalities, shifting the burden to them to demonstrate their innocence in one of Ghana’s most closely watched financial crime cases in recent years.

---