I was framed up

I Was Framed Up(12/23/2004)
Story:Stephen Sah

Hanny Sherry Ayittey,the former Managing Director of GIHOC Distilleries Company Limited, yesterday said that she was framed-up by three prosecution witnesses because she never played any role in the divestiture of Ghana Rubber Estates Limited (GREL).“I had nothing to do with it and Dr Albert Owusu Barnafo, Mr Etienne Popeller and Ms Georgina Okaiteye, came up with something which I had not done,” she said, when continuing with her evidence-in-chief at the Fast Track High Court in Accra.Sherry Ayittey is being tried together with Emmanuel Amuzu Agbodo, the former Executive Secretary of the Divestiture Implementation Committee(DIC),and Ralph Casley-Hayford, a businessman,for playing various roles to influence the divestiture of GREL in favour of Societte Industrielle Plantation Hevea (SIPH), a French company.The accused persons were alleged to have collected some moneys to enable SIPH to benefit from the GREL divestiture. But all three of them have denied the charges and are on self-recognisance bail.Sherry Ayittey, who is also the Treasurer of the DWM, was led in evidence by Mr David Lamptey, her counsel.Asked whether she received a personal gift of $120,000 from Dr Barnafo in May 1998, to influence the GREL divestiture in favour of SIPH, and for which reason she was being tried, the accused denied ever taking the money.During the month of May 1998, she said , as a co-opted member of the DIC, she never performed any function with regard to the GREL divestiture, saying: “The divestiture of GREL even never came up at the DIC in the whole of 1998.”Sherry Ayittey told the court that in May 1998,she was not in the country at all to have seen or met with Dr Barnafo and collected that money.She therefore tendered in evidence photocopies of pages in her passport indicating that she travelled during that period.Explaining her travel outside the country over the period, the accused stated that in March 1998, after former US President Clinton’s visit to Ghana the then government, in co-operation with the USAID, put up a committee to consolidate the issues that came up of the visit.She said that in May 1998, a delegation made up of some ministers of state, Members of Parliament, private and public sector people and women groups travelled to North Carolina in the US to attend a conference which was organised by SIGMA-ONE, a US company.“After the conference,I came back to Ghana and again I travelled with the then First Lady to Ireland to attend another programme dubbed “The Chairman’s Programme” which was organised by the Irish Management Institute.“During May 1998, my two eyes did not see Dr Barnafo anywhere or met him to collect $120, 000 to influence the DIC,” she said.She also tendered in evidence a photocopy of the programme of activities of the Chairman’s Programme.Sherry Ayittey denied a statement by Dr Barnafo during his cross-examination that the DWM held meetings during which the NGO gave three conditions to be met by SIPH before it could benefit from the GREL divestiture.The accused further denied that she was contacted by Dr Barnafo in 1995 and 1996 after the SIPH team of which he was a member and that of the DIC had had several meetings in connection with the GREL divestiture.She said Dr Barnafo could not have given her money to influence the DIC because she was not a member of the DIC team that negotiated the GREL divestiture.Sherry Ayittey said Dr Barnafo never briefed her on the completed purchase and sale agreement of the GREL divestiture.Asked whether she was contacted to intervene on behalf of SIPH to save it from the payment of an extra one million French Francs, which came up after the government’s Memorandum of Understanding, the accused replied in the negative.She said that Dr Barnafo did not contact her about that payment and if it were true that she had taken money to influence the DIC, he would have contacted her to save SIPH from paying the extra money.According to her, knowing he had not given her any money to influence the DIC, Dr Barnafo told the court in his evidence that he personally followed up at the DIC to check on the outcome of the GREL divestiture otherwise he would have left that to her to do.She also denied any knowledge about the DIC’s approval letter that outlined the payment terms of the divestiture to SIPH and explained that she got to know about it when it was tendered in court.Sherry Ayittey said since she did not know about that letter,she could not have been contacted to be part of a concession granted to SIPH to pay the last instalment of the purchase price later after the company could not meet the deadline which was set by the DIC