The Supreme Court has dismissed an application by Solomon Asamoah, the first accused in the $2 million SkyTrain case, seeking to overturn decisions by the trial court over alleged jurisdictional errors and findings he claims could prejudice his defence.

The five-member panel, presided over by Justice Gabriel Pwamang and comprising Justices Samuel Asiedu, Hafisata Amaleboba, Sophia Bernasco-Esaah and Anthony Forson, held that the application ought to fail.

The court consequently refused the applications for certiorari and prohibition.

Challenge to trial judge’s rulings

At the hearing on Wednesday, October 14, 2026, Asamoah’s counsel, Prince Asafo-Agyei, said the application, filed on August 21, 2026, challenged the High Court’s July 2, 2026 decision to dismiss his client’s submission of no case to answer.

He argued that the trial judge had exceeded her jurisdiction by making definitive findings on whether the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to justify a conviction before the trial had concluded.

According to counsel, such findings were beyond the scope of what a court should determine when considering a submission of no case to answer.

He also argued that the judge reviewed Asamoah’s bail conditions on July 30, 2026, while dealing with an application for a stay of proceedings, without first giving the accused an opportunity to respond.

Counsel particularly objected to the judge’s alleged statement that the applicant was “the direct cause of the loss”, arguing that it went beyond the issues requiring determination at that stage and risked prejudicing the defence.

Dispute over bail terms

Asafo-Agyei further challenged the decision to restore his client’s original bail conditions, which required him to report monthly until the trial ended.

He maintained that the applicant was not notified or heard before the decision was taken. He also argued that no application had been made to vary the bail conditions.

He submitted that the judge’s findings, the alteration of the bail terms and what he described as off-record proceedings on July 2, 2026, collectively raised a reasonable apprehension that his client would not receive an impartial hearing.

Attorney-General’s response

Opposing the application, Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem-Sai dismissed the complaint about the bail conditions as unfounded.

He explained that Asamoah had applied for a variation of his bail conditions on February 9, 2026, and that the variation was granted subject to the continuation of the trial.

According to him, once the period covered by the variation expired, the trial judge simply restored the original conditions.

“We do not see any injustice in this case,” he said.

On the alleged jurisdictional overreach, Dr Srem-Sai argued that the applicant had misunderstood the elements of the offence.

He also contended that the allegations supporting the application for prohibition were unfounded and failed to establish any element of bias.

Background to the case

Asamoah, a former Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF), and Professor Christopher Ameyaw-Akumfi, a former board chairman of the fund, are standing trial over an alleged $2 million payment linked to the proposed Accra SkyTrain project, which was never constructed.

The prosecution alleges that the money was transferred from GIIF’s account to South African company Africa Investor Holdings Limited without the requisite approval of the fund’s board.

Both accused persons have pleaded not guilty to the charges.