The High Court has dismissed an application filed by lawyers for former Deputy Director of the National Service Authority (NSA), Gifty Oware-Mensah, seeking to refer aspects of her criminal trial to the Supreme Court for constitutional interpretation.
The application followed a directive from the court ordering Oware-Mensah to file a list of witnesses she intends to call, along with their addresses, in the event she is required to open her defence.
Counsel for the accused argued that the directive contradicts provisions of the 1992 Constitution and infringes on the fundamental right of an accused person to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. On that basis, the defence requested that the constitutional question be referred to the Supreme Court for interpretation.
However, in its ruling, the High Court held that the defence failed to demonstrate the existence of any genuine constitutional issue warranting such a referral. The court therefore dismissed the application in its entirety.
Following the ruling, counsel for the accused, Gary Nomako Marfo, informed the court that the defence would apply for the full written reasons for the decision before advising their client on the next line of action.
Mr. Marfo further disclosed that Oware-Mensah had already filed a Notice of Appeal on January 20, 2026, challenging the court’s order compelling her to submit a list of witnesses and their addresses.
He also indicated that the defence filed a Motion for Stay of Proceedings on February 10, 2026, which is currently pending before the court.
Although the motion was initially scheduled to be heard on February 17, 2026, the hearing has been rescheduled to February 18, 2026, at 10:00 a.m., following concerns raised by the prosecution regarding a scheduling conflict.
Background
Gifty Oware-Mensah is standing trial on multiple charges, including stealing and causing financial loss to the state.
According to the prosecution, she allegedly inserted 9,934 fictitious names into the NSA database and used her private company, Blocks of Life Consult, to secure a GH¢31.5 million loan from the Agricultural Development Bank (ADB).
Prosecutors contend that the loan was obtained under the pretext that the company had supplied goods to national service personnel under a hire-purchase arrangement. However, investigations allegedly revealed that the listed beneficiaries were fictitious and that no goods were supplied.
The prosecution further alleges that the loan funds were paid into the company’s account and later transferred to other companies linked to the accused.
The case is expected to continue on February 18, 2026, when the court will hear the pending motion for stay of proceedings.
