The Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) has moved back to the High Court with a new application seeking stricter bail conditions for former BOST Managing Director Edwin Provencal, only days after his lawyers successfully secured a reduction of his bail from GH¢60 million to GH¢30 million with two sureties.
Provencal, who was arrested on Monday, November 10, at the Kotoka International Airport while attempting to travel to Mozambique, is under investigation for allegedly causing financial loss to the state.
EOCO initially admitted him to an administrative bail of GH¢60 million, but his lawyers successfully applied for a variation before the High Court, resulting in a reduction to GH¢30 million with two sureties.
However, EOCO has now returned to court, praying the High Court to vary its own bail order by including two key requirements, which are the Justification of the sureties and a clear reporting schedule for the accused during the pendency of investigations.
In an affidavit sworn by Joseph Normesinu, an Assistant Staff Officer at EOCO, the agency argues that the bail as currently structured creates a high risk of non-enforceability should Provencal jump bail. EOCO contends that because the bail was “not justified,” the State may have no property or financial means to fall on during forfeiture proceedings.
According to the affidavit, the absence of justification means “the sureties are not to provide any property on which the Republic will fall in execution of the bail sum if the Applicant/Respondent jumps bail and the sureties cannot produce him.”
EOCO insists that justification is a standard safeguard to ensure that sureties possess the capacity to pay the bail amount in the event of default.
The motion argues that “a surety is a financial guarantor who must possess the means and capacity to pay the bail sum,” adding that without an assessment of the sureties’ financial standing, the Republic is left exposed.
EOCO further notes that the Court’s order did not include any reporting schedule, a key requirement in cases where investigations are still ongoing.
As such, the Office is asking the Court to vary its 18 November decision to include these additional conditions “so that this bail may not avail to nothing during forfeiture.”
Source: Citinewsroom.com
Discussion about this post