Sky Train Trial: Defence Argues $2 Million Loss Was Caused by Covid-19, Not Criminal Wrongdoing

Lawyers for former Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF) CEO Solomon Asamoah and former Board Chairman Prof. Christopher Ameyaw-Akumfi have told the High Court that the alleged $2 million loss in the Sky Train deal was a consequence of the Covid-19 pandemic, not criminal wrongdoing — a defence argument that could determine whether the case proceeds to a full trial.

The submission of no case, filed after the Attorney General closed its prosecution, asks the court to dismiss the charges and bring the trial to an end without requiring the accused persons to open their defence. Justice Audrey Kocuvie-Tay granted the defence three weeks to file the application and will determine whether the prosecution has established a case requiring an answer.

The Charges

Asamoah and Prof. Ameyaw-Akumfi face charges of causing financial loss to the state over the alleged disbursement of $2 million for the proposed Sky Train project without approval from the GIIF Board. The prosecution’s case rests on testimony from three witnesses: former GIIF Board member Yaw Odame-Darkwa, acting GIIF Board Secretary Kofi Boakye, and National Intelligence Bureau officer Francis Aboagye, who led investigations into the matter.

All three witnesses testified that the GIIF Board did not approve the Sky Train project for which the funds were allegedly disbursed. The prosecution argued that the disbursement without board authorisation constitutes a criminal act that resulted in a direct financial loss to the state.

The Defence Position

The defence takes a fundamentally different view of the same events. Their submission contends that the loss of the $2 million investment was a consequence of the global Covid-19 pandemic, which disrupted projects and business activities worldwide. The argument implicitly acknowledges that the funds were disbursed but reframes the loss as an economic casualty rather than a criminal outcome.

The distinction matters enormously. If the court accepts the defence’s framing, it would establish that external economic shocks — rather than deliberate mismanagement or corruption — were responsible for the investment’s failure. The defence’s no-case submission essentially argues that even if every factual claim made by the prosecution is accepted as true, the evidence does not establish the elements of the offence charged.

The Broader Context

The Sky Train project was one of several infrastructure initiatives the GIIF was designed to finance as part of Ghana’s development ambitions. The fund, established to channel investment into critical infrastructure, has faced scrutiny over its governance structures and decision-making processes.

The trial has drawn public attention not only because of the sums involved but because it sits at the intersection of governance, accountability, and the economic disruption wrought by the pandemic. Whether the court views the $2 million loss through the lens of criminal negligence or pandemic-era economic forces will shape not just this case but the broader conversation about how public officials are held accountable for investment decisions made during extraordinary circumstances.

The court is expected to rule on the no-case submission in the coming weeks, a decision that will determine whether the Attorney General must retool its strategy or whether the two former officials walk free.

Image Source: MYJOYONLINE