By Mohamed Foday Conteh
Justices of the Appeal Court having heard arguments from both appellant and state counsel with regards the Commissions of Inquiry (COI) appeal matter involving former Minister of Health and Sanitation, Miatta Kargbo has on the 23rd June 2021 reserved judgment in two weeks’ time.
It is on record that Kargbo was one of the indicted persons of the (COI) based on findings that the former minister misappropriated funds and also failed to declare her assets as per law, among others.
State Counsel, Robert Kowa stated in his argument that from the findings of the COI, the former minister evaded taxes with regards to ambulances that were purchased for the Ebola epidemic in the country. He added that the appellant also failed to pay the required freight fees. He said this was corroborated in the report that followed testimonies from one Ibrahim Sorie Kamara, a Commissioner of Domestic Tax and one Kapuwa who was then Permanent Secretary at the said Ministry. Lawyer Kowa also stated that Kapuwa was part of the Health Ministry’s Procurement team.
He said Kargbo breached procurement regulations by awarding contracts via word of mouth when she was the Chairperson of the Emergency Operations Centre (EOC) fighting the Ebola epidemic. He said the findings allude that the then minister could not account for funds and assets worth billions of Leones. Lawyer Kowa argued that the findings also stated the former minister doled out funds to Coalition of Health for all, without following due process.
However, counsel for the appellant, Melron Nicol-Wilson argued that some of the claims made by the state counsel were not the role of his client but rather that of the Permanent Secretary at the time.
Nicol-Wilson argued that Kargbo only spent 14 months as Minister of Health and Sanitation. He went on to state that she was only acting as instructed by the cabinet when she doled out the funds.
He referred to the findings that claimed Kargbo could not account for over Le. 33 billion when she was the chairperson of the EOC to which he objected, citing that his client was only the chairperson for a specific duration.
He argued that some of the findings should not be subjected only to his client and that referencing the findings was tantamount to misleading the court
The case presided over by Justices Ivan Sesay, Momoh Jah-Stevens and Adrian Fisher was then adjourned for judgment.
Copyright © 2021 Politico Online
