Former Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF) Governing Board Chairman, Professor Christopher Ameyaw-Akumfi, has mounted a detailed defence against criminal charges arising from the controversial and abortive Accra SkyTrain Project, insisting that the US$2 million transaction at the centre of the case was a lawful equity investment and not an illegal payment for the railway project.

Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi is standing trial before the High Court (Criminal Division) in Accra together with former GIIF Chief Executive Officer Solomon Asamoah.

The former GIIF chairman has pleaded his innocence and rejected the prosecution’s characterization of the transaction as an unauthorised dissipation of public funds.

According to his defence, the money was approved through the appropriate institutional structures and was used to acquire a 10 per cent equity stake in Ai SkyTrain Consortium Holdings (Mauritius), the special purpose vehicle established to develop the project.

The defence’s position comes after the High Court dismissed submissions of no case to answer filed by the accused persons and directed them to open their defence.

Defence disputes prosecution’s account

At the heart of the case is the US$2 million transferred to Africa Investor Holdings Limited in connection with the Accra SkyTrain Project.

The prosecution has alleged that the accused persons caused the transfer of the funds for the construction of an urban sky train system in Accra which was never built.

Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi’s defence, however, argues that the payment was not construction financing. It says the money represented an equity contribution in exchange for a 10 per cent interest in the project development vehicle.

The defence has pointed to GIIF’s audited financial statements for 2019 and 2020, as well as bank transfer records, as evidence supporting its position.

It further relied on testimony from the prosecution’s third witness, Senior Intelligence Officer Francis Aboagye of the Bureau National Intelligence, BNI, who, according to the defence, acknowledged during cross-examination that GIIF’s statutory mandate under the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund Act, 2014 (Act 877), included acting as an anchor equity investor in project development vehicles.

Following the transfer in March 2019, GIIF was issued a share certificate confirming its equity ownership, the defence said.

Board approval becomes key battleground

Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi’s defence has also challenged any suggestion that the investment bypassed GIIF’s internal approval processes.

According to documents placed before the court, the proposed contribution was first considered by the GIIF Investment Committee, which evaluated and recommended the project development contribution in September 2018.

The defence also cited minutes of a GIIF Governing Board meeting held on October 24, 2018. Those minutes recorded the Board’s approval for US$2 million to be invested in the Accra SkyTrain project, with GIIF serving as the anchor investor in return for a 10 per cent stake.

An addendum to the 2019 budget estimates subsequently classified the SkyTrain investment among projects that had already received Board approval and provided for a US$2 million drawdown.

The defence further pointed to an emergency Board meeting held in November 2019, during which the status of the project was discussed. It says no Board member questioned the validity of the investment or suggested that it had not been approved.

Why Ameyaw-Akumfi signed the payment

Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi has also explained why his signature appeared on the bank transfer instructions.
He maintained that, as a non-executive Board Chairman, he was not responsible for GIIF’s day-to-day operations or cash management.

Under GIIF’s internal disbursement arrangements, expenditures exceeding GH¢500,000 required the joint signatures of the Chief Executive Officer and Board Chairman.

The defence said the payment requisition was generated and processed by GIIF’s professional finance team, which was responsible for ensuring that the necessary approvals and supporting documentation were in place.
It therefore argues that the former chairman’s countersignature merely facilitated the execution of an already-approved institutional decision and did not amount to a criminal act.

COVID-19 cited as reason project stalled

Another major component of the defence is the argument that the failure of the SkyTrain project cannot automatically be attributed to criminal conduct.

The defence says the project’s development phase coincided with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and the global lockdowns that disrupted economic activity in 2020.

It has consequently argued that unforeseen external events interrupted the project’s implementation and that commercial failure or delay should not retrospectively be treated as criminal conduct.

The defence has also invoked Ghanaian case law on the requirement for the prosecution to establish the necessary criminal intent in cases involving allegations of wilfully causing financial loss to the state.

No audit declared the investment a loss – defence

Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi’s lawyers have further challenged the assertion that the US$2 million should be treated as an actual financial loss to the state.

The defence pointed to audits conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and Deloitte & Touche, arguing that neither classified the investment as dissipated or lost during his tenure.

It also cited the Auditor-General’s report, particularly paragraph 928, which recommended that GIIF continue to monitor the feasibility and recoverability of the investment.

According to the defence, that recommendation indicates that the investment remained a corporate asset whose recoverability was being monitored, rather than an amount conclusively determined to have been lost.

Why Joe Ghartey was not called
The defence has also raised questions about the prosecution’s failure to call former Minister for Railways Development Joe Ghartey, whose ministry was directly involved in originating the SkyTrain project.

According to the defence, the relevant agreements placed responsibility for securing Cabinet and parliamentary approvals on the Ministry of Railways Development rather than GIIF.

It argues that testimony from the former minister could have provided important evidence on the origins and approval structure of the project.

The defence further challenged evidence attributed to Ghartey by an investigator, arguing that the former minister’s signed police statement contained only a brief denial of wrongdoing and that other alleged statements attributed to him had not been recorded or signed.

Ameyaw-Akumfi distances himself from post-2020 events

Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi has also drawn a clear line between his responsibilities as GIIF Board Chairman and developments after he left office.

His tenure ended in December 2020, after which he said he no longer had authority to direct GIIF’s management, supervise its operations or monitor its investments.

A new Governing Board was constituted in January 2021, transferring responsibility for the Fund’s governance and investment oversight to the new Board and executive management.

He maintains that he had no capacity to compel the new management to take any particular action concerning the SkyTrain investment and denies personally benefiting from the transaction.