Gifty Oware-Mensah
A High Court in Accra yesterday dismissed an application by former Executive Deputy Director of the National Service Authority (NSA), Gifty Oware-Mensah, asking it to halt her trial and refer Article 19(2) (c) to the Supreme Court (SC) for interpretation, following the court’s order on her to file the names and addresses of witnesses she would call when required.
She is currently standing trial before the court for allegedly stealing and causing financial loss of GH¢38.4 million to the state.
Her lead counsel, Gary Nimako Marfo, had challenged the order given by Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay on November 25, 2025, arguing that the order which was supported by the practice direction issued by the Judiciary in 2018, contradicts the provisions of the constitution which guarantees fair trial and the presumption of innocence of an accused person.
The court, reading the concluding part of its decision, was of the opinion that the accused person did not demonstrate that a need for interpretation had arisen to warrant a referral to the apex court and a stay of proceedings.
Mr. Nimako had argued that the accused bears no burden to prove her innocence, hence where the practice direction on disclosures and case management proceedings has provided that at case management stage, an accused person shall, disclose the names and addresses of all witnesses “is inconsistent with the presumption of innocence as provided for under Article 19(2) (c) of the Constitution.”
He further argued that the drafters of the said practice direction foresaw the conflict between this directive and Article 19(2) (c) of the Constitution, hence the decision to precede the directive with the phrase “without prejudice.”
The Director of Public Prosecutions, Yvonne Atakora Obuobisa, disagreed with him, arguing that section of the practice direction being challenged, when read together with other parts, will indicate that the trial court intends to assist the accused person by ensuring, for instance, that witness summons are issued timeously if need be.
According to her, a careful reading of part 2(3) (a) of the practice direction indicates that the enshrined presumption of innocence of the accused is carefully protected.
“The need to disclose names and addresses is by no means a call on the accused person to disclose any evidence at the case management stage. Rather, the purpose is to lend help to the accused, should the accused person require the intervention of the court to compel any of his witnesses to attend court,” she further indicated.
She added that if the language of a provision is clear, precise and unambiguous, no interpretation arises, noting that “there is no issue for interpretation and referrals ought not to be made for the Supreme Court.”
Appeal Notice
Meanwhile, lawyers for Mrs. Oware-Mensah have filed a notice of appeal to challenge the decision of the court ordering her to file the names and addresses of her witnesses.
They have subsequently filed an application for stay of proceedings pending the determination of the appeal.
The court has adjourned the case to February 18, 2026, to determine the application for stay of proceedings.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak
