Former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice Godfred Yeboah Dame says his office was never served with notice of an appeal filed by former MASLOC Chief Executive Officer Sedina Tamakloe Attionu in 2024.
Mr Dame said the alleged appeal was not mentioned during the extradition proceedings against Ms Tamakloe Attionu, which began in July 2024 and concluded in April 2026.
He also said it did not appear in documents filed by Ms Tamakloe Attionu herself before the United States District Court for the District of Nevada.
The former Attorney-General made the comments in a statement issued on Friday, 31 July 2026, responding to public criticism after the Court of Appeal acquitted and discharged Ms Tamakloe Attionu and overturned her 10-year prison sentence.
According to Mr Dame, state attorneys told the Court of Appeal in both oral and written submissions in April 2026 that they had not been served with a notice of appeal. He said they only became aware of the proceedings after the court ordered the parties to submit written arguments.
Mr Dame rejected suggestions that the Akufo-Addo government, or he personally, should be blamed for the outcome of the appeal. He described such claims as a “false and devious narrative” being advanced by communicators of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and other supporters of the current government.
He said that, even if an appeal had been lodged in 2024, the state would not have been required to take action because Ms Tamakloe Attionu had taken no further steps as an appellant until after the NDC returned to power.
“In any event, even if an appeal was filed by Sedina Attionu in 2024, it is completely immaterial because she took no further step as the accused/appellant until the NDC came back to power. Thus, the Republic had to do nothing in 2024 in terms of the conduct of that appeal,” he stated.
Mr Dame said his responsibility as Attorney-General after the High Court conviction was to ensure that Ms Tamakloe Attionu was returned to Ghana to serve the sentence imposed on her.
He therefore pursued an extradition request. The United States District Court of Nevada upheld that request in an order dated 9 April 2026, confirming the extradition and committing Ms Tamakloe Attionu to custody pending her extradition by the Secretary of State.
Appeal proceedings
Mr Dame said lawyers for Ms Tamakloe Attionu obtained permission from the Court of Appeal to file written submissions on 10 February 2026. They filed those submissions two days later, on 12 February.
He stressed that he was no longer Attorney-General at that stage.
The prosecuting state attorneys were served with the submissions on 16 February, according to Mr Dame, who said they had not previously known that appeal proceedings were pending. They subsequently prepared arguments opposing the appeal and sought permission to file them. Those submissions were filed on 9 April 2026.
In their arguments, the state attorneys raised concerns about an incomplete record of appeal. They said the record did not include all the exhibits presented by the prosecution during the original trial and stated that they “became aware of the instant proceeding … after the Court had directed the Parties to file their written submissions”.
The Court of Appeal, presided over by Mensah Datsa JA, then ordered that three volumes of the record be made available to the Republic. Mr Dame said the state had not had access to those volumes when it filed its written submissions.
After reviewing the material, the Republic applied to add three documents to the record of appeal. The application was granted on 28 May 2026, and the case was adjourned until 17 June.
Mr Dame noted that he was not Attorney-General during these stages of the proceedings either. On 17 June, a different panel, presided over by Ankamah JA, heard the case for the first time and adjourned it for judgment.
The Court of Appeal subsequently acquitted and discharged Ms Tamakloe Attionu, who had been convicted by the High Court on charges linked to alleged financial misconduct during her time as MASLOC chief executive.
Mr Dame said the public criticism of the acquittal was justified because of what he described as the strong evidence presented at trial, which received extensive media coverage.
He further alleged that the decision reflected a wider pattern of cases involving leading NDC members and affiliates being discontinued by the Attorney-General. He said it contributed to a perception that Ghana’s justice system operated with “two sets of law for two sets of people”.
Mr Dame compared the controversy to the Woyome scandal and called on Ghanaians to demand greater accountability from the government. He also criticised what he described as a policy of “ORAL”, under which opposition figures were brought before the courts in corruption-related cases while facing difficult trial conditions.
He concluded that a justice system in which political allies avoided accountability while opponents struggled to have their rights respected would damage the reputation of the state.
