Martin Luther Kpebu, a renowned lawyer, has expressed certainty in the significance of the fresh evidence acquired by the Attorney-General (A-G) in the ongoing trial against the former CEO of the National Food and Buffer Stock Company Limited, Hanan Abdul-Wahab Aludiba.
He says the Attorney-General himself knows how that matter, as well as others under the government’s Operation Recover All Loot (ORAL), are of importance to Ghanaians, which is why they have no option but to deliver on it for the citizenry.
According to Kpebu, the goodwill of this administration is highly hinged on how it fares on ORAL, which is why he says the A-G has no option but to deliver on the matter to the satisfaction of Ghanaians.
His comments follow the State’s withdrawal of the criminal charges against former National Food and Buffer Stock Company Limited Chief Executive Officer, Hanan Abdul-Wahab Aludiba, and his co-accused in the ongoing GH¢78 million alleged loss case.
The Deputy Attorney-General, Dr. Justice Edem Srem-Sai, who announced the withdrawal in court on Tuesday, May 5, indicated that the decision followed the discovery of fresh evidence aimed at ensuring a fair trial.
Reacting to the development on Ghana Tonight on TV3 Tuesday, May 5, 2026, the legal practitioner said the A-G wouldn’t have withdrawn the charges to file new charges ones if the fresh evidence it has obtained was not worth it.
“The Attorney-General himself says that he knows Ghanaians are very expectant. Ghanaians can’t wait. For them, ORAL must work quickly,” he noted, adding that the government will be measured by how many people they will successfully prosecute, irrespective of how well they perform.
“In actual fact, some have even lost patience and some have said that, no matter what this government does for Ghanaians, if they don’t ensure that people who have looted our monies are held accountable…, so they are aware that no matter what they do, the main yardstick that this government will be measured by is the results that will be achieved under ORAL,” he indicated.
“So for the A-G to withdraw all the charges and says he’s going to start afresh, then I promise you,… looking at everything, it must really be worth it. They won’t withdraw charges just to file new ones if the figures involved are immaterial.”
He explained further that the government is aware of the backlash should they mess up the trial, the reason he is confident the A-G is returning stronger with its fresh charges.
“They know that if it is not material, Ghanaians will call for their blood and I don’t think they want to take such risk needlessly.”
The Deputy Attorney-General later provided some update on the fresh charges on social media. In court, Dr. Srem-Sai had explained that the prosecution had opted to discontinue proceedings against the two accused persons.
Following the announcement, the court struck out the charges against Mr Aludiba and his wife, Faiza Seidu Wuni, effectively discharging them from the case. The two had previously pleaded not guilty to all charges.
In a post-sitting explanation, Dr Srem-Sai said the decision was taken after the emergence of fresh evidence.
“The move was intended to ensure that each of the accused persons is given a fair and speedy trial in accordance with the Constitution,” he stated.
However, shortly after their discharge, the two were re-arrested by the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), although details of the fresh development were not immediately clear.
Background of case
The case involves allegations relating to the purchase and supply of foodstuffs under the national school feeding programme, with prosecutors initially claiming a financial loss of about GH¢78 million to the state. Several other accused persons and companies remain on trial.
At earlier proceedings, the prosecution had filed witness statements on April 24, 2026, but sought to revert to earlier statements filed in December 2025, a move that triggered legal arguments in court.
The case also saw a dispute over the involvement of an Assistant Staff Officer from the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) in the prosecution team. Defence lawyers challenged the legality of the officer’s participation, arguing that prosecutorial authority must strictly comply with the Law Officers Act.
Presiding judge Justice Achibonga subsequently ordered the temporary removal of the EOCO officer from the proceedings and directed the Attorney-General’s Department to provide proof of proper authorisation.
