Attorney General-designate, Godfred Dame has said his former boss Madam Gloria Akuffo was not mandated to give reasons for discontinuing the trial of ‘Aisha’ Huang and four other Chinese nationals who were alleged to have engaged in illegal mining activities in the country.

He said she cannot be forced by anyone including the courts to disclose the reason for discontinuing the case.

According to him, the Supreme Court has held in the case of Gregory Afoko vs the Attorney General that the powers of the Attorney General to enter a nolle prosequi, a decision to no longer prosecute, “is not questionable, it cannot be probed by anybody including the court.”

He was responding to question by North Tongu Member of Parliament Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa who asked the nominee to explain the reasons for discontinuation of the case.

Dame who was the Deputy Attorney General then, made the submissions before the Appointments Committee of Parliament during his vetting on Friday, February 12.

He added, “I was not the Attorney General, it is only Madam Gloria Akuffo, my former boss, who will know and indeed she is not bound, as I said, even to disclose the reasons to the court and so the reason for the entry of the nolle prosequi has not been published and I wouldn’t know why.”
On December 19, 2018, without giving any reasons, the State Attorney, Mercy Arthur, presented an application for nolle prosequi to the Accra High Court, that was presided over by Justice Charles Ekow Baiden.

Aisha and her compatriots were first arraigned on May 9, 2018, for engaging in illegal small-scale mining at Bepotenten in the Amansie Central District of the Ashanti Region.

Aisha Huang was charged with three counts of undertaking small-scale mining operations, contrary to Section 99 (1) of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703); providing mining support services without valid registration with the Minerals Commission, contrary to the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703), and the illegal employment of foreign nationals, contrary to the Immigration Act, 2000 (Act 573).

It was also alleged that she had granted sexual favours to some top officials and continued to enjoy their support due to threats of blackmail if they attempted to expose her.