Ghana is expected to appoint lawyers latest by Tuesday, August 8 to defend the country in a legal suit brought before the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights by Alfred Agbesi Woyome.

The embattled businessman at the centre of the infamous $51.2 million judgment debt scandal has revealed in a reaction to the arbitration decision of the International Criminal Court (ICC) that he has filed a suit at the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights in Arusha, Tanzania to seek redress on human rights issues.

The statement added that “Ghana has also been ordered [by the African Court] to file their response within 30 days” after the appointment of the lawyers.

The statement acknowledges that the decision of the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce dated 3rd August 2017 which means the case Agbesi Woyome brought before the ICC did not meet minimum requirement was right and expected.

The statement intimated the Supreme Court of Ghana erred by linking Alfred Agbesi Woyome to the Waterville contract by “necessary linkage” using the now “residual unspecified Jurisdiction” which culminated in an order by the court for him to refund the money to the state. That, the statement said was an abuse of Woyome’s human rights as occasioned by the Review Decision of the Supreme Court of Ghana.

The aspect of the case that borders on the abuse of the human rights has since been filed at the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights for redress “invoking article 40 read together with article 75 of the 1992 Constitution of The Republic of Ghana under case number Ref: AfCHPR/Reg./appl.001/2017/001”.

Ghana and all the following entities have since been served the necessary processes: The Chairperson of African Union Commission, The Executive Secretary of African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, All states Party to the Protocol and The Executive Council of the African Union, through the Chairperson of African Union Commission.

Alfred Woyome’s case at the International Criminal court was thrown out for not meeting the minimum requirement of a case that should be brought before the court.