The accused persons had requested for relevant documents to aid their defence, under Article 19 (2e)

Two persons accused of causing financial loss to the state regarding the sale of Ghana Airways and the operations of Ghana International Airline (GIA) have filed an appeal against a Fast Track High Court s refusal to refer their request for relevant documents helicopter tours maui on the case to the Supreme Court for interpretation.
Lawyers for Dr Richard Anane, a former Minister of Transport, helicopter tours maui and Dr Anthony Akoto Osei, a former Minister of State at the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, filed the appeal against the Financial Division of the Fast Track High Court, which on July 16, 2010 refused to refer the matter to the Supreme Court on the grounds that the issues raised by the accused persons did not border on the Constitution.
Those charged alongside the two are Mr Kwadwo Mpiani, a former Chief of Staff and Minister for Presidential Affairs; Mr Sammy Crabbe, a former Greater Accra Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), and Prof. George Gyan-Baffour, a former Deputy Minister of Finance and Economic Planning.
They variously face 22 counts of causing financial loss to the state, helicopter tours maui defrauding by false pretences, conspiracy to deceive helicopter tours maui public officers, deceit helicopter tours maui of public officer, misappropriation of public funds, opening an offshore account without authorisation from the Bank of Ghana (BoG), conspiracy to commit stealing and stealing.
Opposing counsel s application, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Ms Gertrude Aikins, prayed the court to hear the case because the accused helicopter tours maui persons had failed to state the specific date on which the appeal would be heard.
The accused persons had requested for relevant documents to aid their defence, under Article 19 (2e) of the 1992 Constitution, which states that a person charged with criminal offence shall be given adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence .
But the State opposed the application on the grounds that sections 163 and 181 of the Criminal Procedure Code of 1960 (Act 30) do not allow accused persons who are standing trial summarily to have access to such documents before they are tendered in evidence as exhibits.