Court throws out Attorney-General's bid to Block Hanan Abdul-Wahab's medical trip

An Accra High Court has dismissed an application by the Attorney-General's Department seeking to revoke an earlier court order that permitted the former Chief Executive Officer of the National Buffer Stock Company (NAFCO), Hanan Abdul-Wahab, to travel to London for medical treatment.

The court struck out the application after ruling that it had become moot, since the travel permission granted on July 4 had already expired on July 12, leaving no valid order to revoke.

The ruling marks another twist in the legal battle surrounding Mr Abdul-Wahab, whose attempted departure from Ghana ended dramatically with his arrest at the Kotoka International Airport (KIA) after prosecutors alleged he had breached aspects of his bail conditions.

Court declines to entertain State's application

In delivering its decision, the court held that the Attorney-General's application could not proceed because the travel order it sought to overturn was no longer in force.

The decision effectively ends the State's attempt to revoke the medical travel permission, although broader legal issues relating to Mr Abdul-Wahab's bail conditions remain unresolved.

Godfred Dame attacks State's conduct

Following the ruling, lead counsel for Mr Abdul-Wahab and former Attorney-General, Godfred Yeboah Dame, sharply criticised the Attorney-General's Department, accusing it of deliberately frustrating the execution of a valid court order.

According to Mr Dame, his client was denied the opportunity to travel for medical treatment because state authorities arrested and detained him despite the court's approval.

"I think first and foremost, the conduct of the State must really be emphasised," Mr Dame told journalists.

"I'm quite surprised that the State will actually behave in this way, conduct itself in a way just to violate a citizen of Ghana in this manner."

They frustrated the court's order

Mr Dame alleged that Mr Abdul-Wahab was held in custody for four days and four nights, preventing him from travelling within the period authorised by the court.

He argued that the Attorney-General's subsequent application to revoke the travel order was legally flawed because the order had already expired by the time it was brought before the court.

"They prevented the court order from being obeyed by arresting him and detaining him for four days and four nights, and then deliberately filed a motion until after the lapse of the order," he alleged.

The former Attorney-General maintained that the application was incompetent from the outset.

"I'm surprised that the Deputy Attorney-General will come to court seeking to revoke an order which has already lapsed. Clearly, that application was incompetent and could not be granted because the order had expired," he said.

Passport still at the centre of dispute

Mr Dame further accused the State of orchestrating the expiry of the travel permission by confiscating his client's passport and other personal belongings after his arrest.

According to the defence, those actions made it impossible for Mr Abdul-Wahab to take advantage of the court's permission before it expired.

The Attorney-General's Department has yet to publicly respond to the allegations made by the defence.

Legal battle far from over

Although the High Court has struck out the Attorney-General's application, the broader dispute over Mr Abdul-Wahab's bail conditions, his request to travel abroad for medical treatment, and the continued retention of his passport remains unresolved.

The case is expected to continue as both the prosecution and defence pursue their respective legal positions.

The latest ruling, however, underscores the importance of timing in court proceedings and leaves unanswered questions about whether Mr Abdul-Wahab was effectively prevented from exercising a right that had already been granted by the court.