Lawyer Appiah-Kubi has said any appeal against his former client, Chairman Wontumi’s conviction should focus on whether the evidence presented at trial supported the offences for which he was convicted.
Mr Kubi rejected suggestions that his assessment of the case was political, insisting his concerns relate to the legal and evidential basis of the judgment.
“I agree that the evidence on record cannot support the verdict,” he said on Keypoints on TV3.
When asked whether he regarded Wontumi as a political prisoner, he drew a distinction between politics and the legal issues he intends to pursue.
“I didn’t see any politics in the records, but what I’m saying is that the judgment cannot be supported by the evidence,” he stated.
The lawyer argued that one of the issues likely to feature in the appeal concerns the allegation that Wontumi personally assigned a mining concession.
According to him, the concession belonged to a corporate entity, not to Wontumi in his personal capacity, and that distinction should be considered in determining criminal liability.
“The basic principle in law is nemo dat. You cannot give what you do not have,” he said.
He maintained that a company is legally distinct from its directors and shareholders, adding that the appeal would examine whether the charges properly reflected that principle.
“The corporate body is different from a director or a shareholder,” he said.
The lawyer also indicated that he disagreed with the court’s interpretation of portions of the evidence and maintained that the appellate court should reassess both the record and the legal conclusions reached at trial.
