It emerged during further cross-examination by Mrs. Victoria Barth, counsel for Mr. Solomon Asamoah, in the “Sky Train Case” that a memorandum of Understanding (MoU) had been signed between the sponsors of the Sky Train project and the Ministry of Railway Development on February 22, 2018, to facilitate the development of a pre-feasibility study for a significant investment in the Accra Sky Train project.
GIIF was not a party to that agreement, as the project began as a Ministry of Railways project with the South African consortium.
Documents admitted in evidence also show that the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF) became involved with the Sky Train project only after the pre-feasibility study had been completed by the consortium spearheading the project with the MoRD.
GIIF then signed the MOU on 8 November 2018, following GIIF Board approval in the 24 October 2018 Board meeting.
The prosecution’s second witness, Kofi Boakye, a former member of the board of GIIF and an acting Secretary to the Board, had denied the involvement of GIIF in the project, indicating that “at no point in time was an approval given by the board that GIIF should participate in the Sky Train project.”
However, Victoria Barth, counsel for Mr. Asamoah, referenced a document, the Accra Skytrain Update report dated 29 January 2019 which is already in evidence, where the then CEO told the board that “after the pre-feasibility was concluded, and following several months of engagement in the project, the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF), a body corporate wholly owned by the Republic of Ghana and established pursuant to the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Act, 2014 (Act 877) joined the project, as the local project development partner and anchor equity investor.”
Although the witness admitted this, he claimed that the board of GIIF had never given formal approval for GIIF to participate in this project.
“A presentation had been made to IC (Investment and Finance Committee), and IC had directed management to return with an investment memo on the Sky Train project for it to be considered by the committee and a recommendation made to the board. The IC did not recommend to the board that it participate or join the Sky Train project,” the witness further claimed.
Defence Counsel then pointed out to the witness that at the time Mr. Asamoah provided the 29 January 2019 update on the Sky Train Consortium, neither he nor any board member objected to GIIF’s participating in the Sky Train project.
The witness, however, claimed that the board members raised their concerns about GIIF’s participation in the consortium during an emergency meeting.
His attention was then drawn to the fact that the said emergency meeting was in November 2019, nine months after the CEO had updated the board on the status of the Sky Train project.
“Is it your case that between 5th February, 2019, when the update in exhibit 28A was provided to all board members, none of the board members expressed any concerns or whatsoever until nine months later when an emergency meeting was called in exhibit 6?” the lawyer asked.
Mr. Boakye, in his response, said “on the contrary, members had always asked for updates on the Sky Train project from the CEO,” adding that the emergency meeting was held when the need arose for more information on the project.
Mrs. Barth also pointed the witness to a portion of the minutes of the meeting, which he recorded as the Acting Secretary, where he recorded Mr. Asamoah’s reference to the board approval for the Sky Train project.
“You also recorded that he had informed the board that there was an MoU to be executed following that approval. Is that correct?” the lawyer asked.
The witness answered in the affirmative, stating, “That is correct.”
Again, the defence lawyer pointed to another paragraph in the minutes of the November 2019 emergency board meeting recorded by the witness, in which Mr. Asamoah was invited by the board chairman to update the board on the Sky Train project and his recent visit to South Africa.
In the said minutes, Mr. Asamoah informed the meeting that “after the memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed last year (November 2018), the terms of reference were prepared, and the concession agreement was drafted, having been negotiated with the Ministry of Finance (MoF), Attorney General’s Office, and Ministry of Railway Development.”
It continued that “the concession agreement was signed in South Africa on 12th November 2019 at a signing ceremony with the President of the Republic of Ghana present.”
When Mr. Boakye was asked if he agreed, he captured that in the board’s minutes. He answered, “My Lady, that is correct… This meeting had been called because the CEO had travelled without notice to the board, and upon his return, the chairman called for this emergency meeting.”
Hearing was subsequently adjourned to Monday, 2 March 2026, for further cross-examination of the second prosecution witness, Mr. Kofi Boakye.
Background
In 2019, the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund (GIIF) invested US$2 million for a 10% stake in Africa Investor Skytrain Consortium Holdings (“Ai Skytrain”), the company developing Accra’s Skytrain light railway project.
The Africa Investor Group (the “Sponsors”) was selected and granted the rights to develop the project by the Government of Ghana (“GoG”) through the Ministry of Railways Development (“MORD”).
At the time, the Chairman of GIIF was Professor Christopher Ameyaw-Akumfi, and the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) was Mr Solomon Asamoah. The Chairman had previously been a member of the GoG. Mr. Asamoah was an international development banker who had been headhunted for the position by a UK recruitment agency.
Following a change of government in Ghana in December 2024, the GoG, through the office of the Attorney General of Ghana, now alleges that this action was taken without Board approval, resulting in a wilful financial loss to the state, as there is as yet “no railway built”.
It should be noted that there are no allegations of personal gain or diversion of funds in the charges, and the state has not charged anyone from MORD or the GoG-selected sponsors; only the GIIF Chairman and CEO have been charged.
The state witnesses who initially faced charges of causing financial loss to the state themselves dropped these charges after stating they did not approve the project, casting significant doubt on the reliability of their statements.
The prosecution’s case is built almost entirely on these statements to show that a legitimate transaction was “unauthorized”, without which there would be no case to answer.
“The prosecution’s case appears to be politically motivated, intended to fulfill a campaign promise to prosecute members of the previous government. It is unsupported by the facts, relying on demonstrably false witness statements,” a lawyer familiar with the case stated on condition of anonymity.
_______________
