Court Judgement fallacy! Ready to fight with my last blood – Woyome

Embattled businessman Alfred Woyome has described the Supreme Court of Ghana ruling and that of African court as fallacy.

According to him, he will seek a review of the judgement since he believes that the judgement was unlawful and based on wrong facts.

Mr Woyome has lost the case at the Supreme Court which ordered Thursday, that the state goes ahead to auction listed assets valued at ¢20m to defray the debt.

He has again lost his case against Ghana in the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

The African Court, presided over by Honourable Lady Justice Tujlani Rose Chizumil, on Friday, 28 June 2019 ruled that: “The court finds that the applicant’s rights to nondiscrimination, his right to equality before the law and to equal protection of law as guaranteed under Articles 2 and 3 of the Charter were not violated by the respondent. The court notes that since no violation has been established, the issue of reparation does not arise. Consequently, the applicant’s prayers for reparation is dismissed.”

But reacting to the judgment in an interview with Joy fm, Mr Woyome said: “I reject the claim by the single Judge that I’ve colluded with UT Bank and that it is not true that I took a loan from the defunct bank. I presented in court documents concerning the loan facility and UT did same, so, this particular judgment, I find it very difficult to understand. I’ll move the case to a three-panel Supreme Court … to rule on it. UT Bank can also send the case there and show the court that, indeed, I owe them.”

He said Ghana risks being branded a rogue state if it disrespects an unfavourable judgment of the court to which it is a signatory to its treaty.

“Show me one case in which we have disobeyed international law?” he stressed Ghana’s obligation to abide by international laws and conventions.

The businessman said Ghanaians should be concerned if government could infringe on his rights or disrepect the constitution.

“Everything that has been done [against me] is a precedent that can be used against you.”