Martin Amidu threatens legal action against Tony Lithur, A-G

Former Attorney General Martin Amidu has hinted of plans to later, legally pursue lawyer Tony Lithur and the current Attorney General (AG) Marietta Brew Appiah-Oppong for perjury and abetment.

In a statement copied to citifmonline.com, Mr Amidu said he will not be fooled by baits from Tony Lithur to report him and the AG to the General Legal Council over their involvement in allowing the state to wrongfully pay businessman Alfred Woyome about GHC51 million.

“I am too experienced to take the bait of the line of least resistance favourable to Lithur, Brew & Co being suggested to the innocent public when there are more effective and punitive remedies available to me at an appropriate time and place of my choosing,” he said.

Mr Amidu explained that the two’s involvement with Lithur-Brew and Co, the law firm that represented Aurstro-Invest, the company that benefited from the GHC51 million, constitutes abetment and perjury.

He further explained that he will suspend any attempts to pursue the two because they are deeply involved with government and thus will be unwise to try and prosecute them now.

“Lithur, Brew & Co are so politically deeply married and in bed with the John Dramani Mahama Government that I will be exhibiting crass inexperience and unreasonableness in prosecuting their misconduct and other acts now,” Amidu stated.

Below is the full statement from Mr. Amidu:

WOYOME SCANDAL – EXPOSING PATHOLOGICAL STRANGERS TO THE TRUTH: BY MARTIN A. B. K. AMIDU

This is my rejoinder to Lithur, Brew & Co’s challenge and half-truths contained in the Graphic Online publication of 19^th March 2015 under the title: “Woyome Scandal: Tony Lithur dares Amidu.”

Lithur, Brew & Co ought to know that the General Legal Council is not the only forum to seek redress, particularly when the conduct and acts complained of includes the abetment of perjury. Why had I refused to go to the police with a complaint of perjury and abetment of perjury because of the relationship of Lithur, Brew & Co to the Government and Mrs. Brew Appiah’s position as a member of the General Legal Council nominated by Betty Mould-Iddrisu when she was Attorney General but will now go to the General Legal Council at a time the Attorney General who is from the same firm is an ex officio member of the Council? I am too experienced to take the bait of the line of least resistance favourable to Lithur, Brew & Co being suggested to the innocent public when there are more effective and punitive remedies available to me at an appropriate time and place of my choosing.

Lithur, Brew & Co are so politically deeply married and in bed with the John Dramani Mahama Government that I will be exhibiting crass inexperience and unreasonableness in prosecuting their misconduct and other acts now. The statute of limitation does not apply to certain acts, so I am at liberty to choose how and when to deal with the perjury and abetment of perjury involved in this case. I have eyes and brains to see how Ray Smith has been protected from criminal prosecution just because of having one of his lawyers appointed an Attorney General, to make a complaint affecting that Attorney General, her law firm, and the same Ray Smith while she encumbers the office of the Attorney General. Go and convince mentally exhausted persons to do so!

I answered Mrs. Brew Appiah-Oppong, the Attorney General’s denial of my statement to the press of 15^th March 2015 by publishing in the media my affidavit of 27^th October 2014 in support of the application by Woyome of 26^th October 2015 to set aside the Attorney General’s entry of judgment in my review application granted by the Supreme Court. I challenged Mrs. Brew Appiah-Oppong, the Attorney General to vindicate her integrity by publishing for public consumption her entry of judgment and Woyome’s application to set same aside. She has refused or failed to do so because it will expose her as unfit to hold the office of the Attorney General.

The Attorney General, as my affidavit of 27^th October 2014 shows, did not deny any of the very serious allegations of misconduct Woyome and I made to set aside her unconstitutional entry of judgment that sought to protect her former client, Austro-Invest (Ray Smith) and the Betty Mould-Iddrisu the mentor who first appointed her to the General Legal Council during her tenure to represent the Attorney General’s office (described as the then Attorney General). Woyome stated in paragraph 11 of his accompanying and supporting affidavit that:

“11. That for my part, I have instructed my Solicitors to demand all moneys paid which I paid to Mpowapak Ghana Limited through its Solicitors Lithur, Brew & Co, Accra, as their share of monies paid me by the Republic of Ghana. The directors of Mpowapak Ghana Limited are the same as that of Austro Invest Limited and both acted at all material times through the same directors and Solicitors.”

The Attorney General, Mrs. Brew Appiah-Oppong, the principal legal advisor to the Government admitted our affidavit evidence by filing no affidavit in opposition. Pursuant to this I succeeded in having the unconstitutional entry of judgment set aside by the Supreme Court.

The Attorney General as the constitutional officer responsible for the Woyome case in the Supreme Court knows after assuming office that on 16^th October 2012 I put my complaint against the conduct and actions of Lithur, Brew & Co in issue in my application for prescription of practice and procedure under Rule 5 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1996 (C. I. 16) through my supporting affidavit. Exhibited to my affidavit were documentary evidence from processes filed by Lithur, Brew & Co on behalf of Austro-Invest on the instructions of Ray Smith in the High Court beginning 17^th November 2011; searches from the United Kingdom and Switzerland proving that Ray Smith had liquidated Austro-Invest on 26^th July 2011, more than three (3) moths before Lithur Brew & Co commenced their action on his behalf on 17^th November 2011; a search at the Registrar General’s Department which confirmed that Austro-Invest had never been registered in Ghana as an external company; and the results of the Supreme Court’s order for substituted service on Austro-Invest in Zug, Switzerland. The affidavit evidence has been in her custody since she assumed office as Attorney General in early 2013 for her to deny them now. Comments from the Supreme Court at the hearing of my application were published in the media and Lithur Brew & Co will be ridiculous denying reading them now.

I am surprised that Lithur, Brew & Co can in spite of the overwhelming evidence created and filed in the High Court by itself say with a straight face that I am dragging a fellow practitioner’s reputation so publicly into disrepute based on conjectures, and rather impugning my reputation for unethical and irresponsible conduct. I have deposed to two affidavits on 16^th October 2012 and 27^th October 2014 in the Supreme Court in support of allegations against Lithur, Brew & Co with supporting exhibits which have gone unanswered on oath to date and so how can any truthful and reasonable person contend that my claims are mere conjecture.

My exhibit “MAAS11” adduced evidence of Suit No. AC 96/2012 which Lithur, Brew & Co commenced on 17^th November 2011 in the High Court, Automated/Fast Track Division, Accra in the name of Austro-Invest Management Limited against Alfred Agbesi Woyome. On 8^th December 2011 Lithur, Brew & Co filed an Ex Parte application for leave to serve Writ of Summons, Statement of Claim and Motion for Interlocutory Injunction by substitution. The supporting affidavit filed by them was deposed to by Ray Smith of House Number 16 Wawa Street, Dzorwulu, Accra on 8^th December 2011 in which Ray Smith confirmed that he caused the Writ ad Statement of Claim to issue on 17^th November 2011. In another application on notice for preservation and/or interlocutory injunction filed by Lithur, Brew & Co again on 8^th December 2011 they prayed the Court to compel Woyome “to pay into Court”:

“(a) an amount of GH?5,068,960.08 being the principal sum endorsed on the writ or in the alternative  (b) any and all monies that may be paid to him by the Government of Ghana or any of the Ministries or agents to the Defendant/Respondent in connection with, arising from or relating to Suit No RPC 152/2010, titled Alfred Agbesi Woyome v Attorney General, or in connection with or arising from claims by the Defendant/Respondent  for compensation from the Government of Ghana; PENDING the hearing and determination of the present suit; or in the alternative an order directing the Government of Ghana and/or any of its Ministries or agencies to pay directly into court within the terms stated above, any such monies; UPON the grounds contained in the accompanying affidavit AND for such further order or orders as the Honourable Court may deem fit”

The application was “dated at Lithur, Brew & Company this 5^th day of December 2011”. Accompanying this application was a thirteen paragraph affidavit deposed to by Ray Smith of Austro-Invest. This application was fixed for hearing on Wednesday 21^st December 2011.