Alfred Abgesii Woyome has been in the limelight in the past years. Woyome news alerts that have been hitting the airwaves have to do with the rift between him and the state over a court order. The controversial businessman took to the Supreme Court in Ghana to seek an injunction to stop him from being orally examined by the state.
In the Woyome case that was filed, he sought permanent orders to halt the oral examination by the state that was attempting to recover state property in the tune of 51.2 Million Ghana Cedi. This money was claimed to have been awarded wrongfully to Woyome as a judgment debt.
The oral examination that was to be administered by the state had been approved by the Supreme Court of Ghana and was to be used as a means of determining the properties owned by Wayome and also his business interests. Upon completion of these processes, the state wishes to evaluate the worth of his assets and business for them to determine the best way to recover the money.
The woyome scandal has been continuing for years now. According to JJustice Abuga, he has over the years, through his lawyers, resulted to delay tactics to ensure he does not attend the oral examination. The case was heard by three Supreme Court of Ghana judges namely;
- Justice Sophia Adenyra
- Justice William Atuguba
- Justice Jones Dotse
READ ALSO NPP, Akufo-Addo give Woyome GHc35,000
The three-judge bench dismissed Mr. Wayome’s argument, ruling that proceeding with the court order that mandated him to undertake an oral examination were prejudicial to him in his personal capacity. He claimed that it would be a violation of his human rights. He tried to further convince the court that it would be a breach of the court's own Civil Procedure Rules. The woyome story transcended borders. In trying to stop the proceedings, he also cited the ruling that had been made by the African Human Rights Court that had ordered the Ghanaian government to stop the process of the oral examination until the case he had presented to the regional court had been determined. However, the Supreme Court of Ghana had dismissed the ruling. It stated that there was no representation for the state during the proceedings as they had not been notified. Therefore, the trial was not fair, and the Supreme Court verdict in Ghana saw judges agreeing that it would be unjust to go ahead and enforce that order.