The Majority and Minority factions in Parliament have come together to celebrate a legal victory for Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson in the ambulance case. On July 30, Majority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin praised the Court of Appeal’s ruling, which favored Forson, and advised against accusations of judicial bias or executive influence. Afenyo-Markin stressed the importance of respecting court decisions and seeking appropriate channels for grievances, while also encouraging civility in addressing the Attorney-General, who was absent from the celebrations.
Afenyo-Markin expressed solidarity with the Minority’s celebration but cautioned against using the victory as an opportunity to attack the Attorney-General, emphasizing that such actions could undermine respect for the judiciary. He offered non-alcoholic wine and fruit juice as gestures of goodwill, reflecting his commitment to maintaining a respectful tone in the aftermath of the court decision.
Tamale South MP Haruna Iddrisu commended the Court of Appeal’s decision as a bold affirmation of judicial independence. He criticized the Attorney-General for planning to appeal the ruling, suggesting that further legal action would only lead to additional setbacks. Iddrisu urged the Attorney-General to focus on more substantiated cases rather than continuing with the ambulance trial, which he argued lacked merit.
In response, the Attorney-General’s Office announced its intention to appeal the Court of Appeal’s decision, which acquitted and discharged Forson and his co-accused. The Office contends that the appellate court’s ruling undermines public accountability and disregards substantial evidence presented in the initial case. The Office views the decision as a setback in the fight against corruption and abuse in public office.
The High Court had previously ordered Dr. Forson and others to present their defenses after the Attorney-General’s office made a prima facie case. However, the Court of Appeal’s July 30 ruling overturned this decision, finding insufficient evidence to require a defense. The appellate court acquitted and discharged the accused, attributing any financial losses to the Ministry of Health’s recklessness rather than to the accused individuals.
