General News of Sunday, 10 June 2018

Source: 3news.com

Direct exposés to state agencies instead of publicizing them – Anas told

Yaw Oppong Yaw Oppong

A private legal practitioner, Yaw Oppong is opposed to the kind of publicity given to investigative works such as those contained in Anas Aremeyaw Anas’ Number 12 exposé.

Speaking on TV3 New Day, he counseled that it is important to seek legal directions from the court and other state agencies in dealing with such investigations.

“I think that when the information is obtained or procured by whatever means, it must be given to the appropriate state agencies. For me, it should not even be put out in the public,” Yaw Oppong said.

His comments come on the back of Anas Aremeyaw Anas’ latest exposé on corruption within the Ghana Football Association.

The then president of the association, Kwesi Nyantakyi and some referees, football administrators were caught on tape receiving bribes on separate occasions.

Kwesi Nyantakyi has subsequently resigned as GFA boss, and apologized for what he described as errors he committed.

Addressing the issue, Yaw Oppong stated that while private persons must be encouraged to engage in the work that Tiger Eye PI does, the investigative body led by Anas Aremeyaw Anas ought to consider the legal ramification and the right legal advice.

“Subject it to the judicial process, and if the court directs you or gives you the go ahead to publish it, then you can go ahead,” he suggested.

According to the legal practitioner, evidence gathered in investigative pieces can get tainted in the course of publicizing or publishing it, hence, the need to desist from publicizing it.

“That is where I have a worry, I think to support things like this, other perspectives should have to be looked at,” Yaw Oppong said.

“No one is condoning wrong doing, I will be the very last person to do that. My only worry is that we have enshrined in our constitution a very powerful provision that no one is guilty until proven guilty by a court or through proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction or that he has confessed to the commission of an offense in accordance with law, so we just have to be careful,” he added.