Asaase News: The NDC appears to be suggesting that the appeal in the Sedina Tamakloe Attionu case was filed during your tenure as Attorney-General, and therefore the NPP bears responsibility for what has happened. How do you respond?

Godfred Yeboah Dame: That narrative is misleading and deliberately ignores the chronology of events. Yes, I understand an appeal was filed in 2024, during my tenure.

But merely filing an appeal does not place any obligation on the Republic unless the necessary procedural steps are taken. More importantly, no notice of that appeal ever came to my office’s attention. So we were not aware.

In fact, I understand that when the matter recently came before the Court of Appeal, the State Attorneys informed the court that the Republic had never been served with the appeal. That tells its own story.

Asaase News: So, even if the appeal was filed in 2024, you say that is not the crucial issue?

Godfred Yeboah Dame: Exactly. The date of filing is immaterial if no further steps are taken. Throughout my tenure, the accused took no meaningful action to prosecute the appeal. Consequently, there was nothing requiring a response from the Republic.

Our focus at the time was on securing her extradition to Ghana so that she could serve the sentence imposed by the High Court. That was the appropriate and necessary action.

Asaase News: When, in your understanding, did the appeal process actually become active?

Godfred Yeboah Dame: My understanding is that it was only in February 2026, after there had been a change of government, that lawyers for Sedina applied for leave from the Court of Appeal to file their written submissions. That was the point at which the appeal was actively pursued.

In other words, every substantive step that paved the way for the appeal to be heard and eventually allowed occurred under the current administration, not mine.

Asaase News: There are also questions about the extradition proceedings themselves.

Godfred Yeboah Dame: Indeed. During the extradition proceedings, no mention was made of any pending appeal. If there had been an active appeal capable of affecting the conviction, one would ordinarily have expected that to feature prominently in those proceedings. Its absence raises legitimate questions about the status and handling of the purported appeal.

Asaase News: The Attorney-General has reportedly directed the Director of Public Prosecutions to pursue the matter further. What is your reaction?

Godfred Yeboah Dame: That announcement appears more like a public relations exercise than a legal intervention. Directing the Director of Public Prosecutions to pursue an appeal, after the appeal has already been determined, does not address the central questions that Ghanaians are asking. It sounds more like an attempt to manage public perception than to deal with the substantive legal issues.

Asaase News: The NDC has also drawn comparisons with the Ken Ofori-Atta matter. Are they comparable?

Godfred Yeboah Dame: Not at all. The two cases are fundamentally different.

Ken Ofori-Atta was never served with criminal charges before leaving the jurisdiction. He was never put before a court, never tried and certainly never convicted. Attempting to compare his circumstances with someone who had already gone through a criminal trial, been convicted and sentenced is legally unsound.

Asaase News: Some have also sought to compare the Sedina matter with the Wontumi case.

Godfred Yeboah Dame: Again, they are completely different cases.

The Wontumi case concerns a conviction which, in my view, was reached despite the absence of cogent evidence. Indeed, I have maintained that there was no evidence capable of sustaining the conviction. If that conviction is overturned on appeal in the future, it would not be analogous to the Sedina case.

If anything, the Wontumi case reinforces growing concerns that there are increasingly two standards of justice operating in Ghana. That is the real issue that should concern all of us.

Asaase News: Finally, what do you say to those attempting to make this an election issue?

Godfred Yeboah Dame: Every political party is entitled to make arguments before the electorate. But those arguments should be based on facts, not manufactured narratives.

The undisputed sequence of events is clear. During my tenure, the Republic pursued the extradition of a convicted person. No substantive steps were taken by the accused to prosecute the appeal. The appeal only became active after the change of government, and the critical processes that led to its success all occurred under the current administration.

Those are the facts, and Ghanaians deserve to judge the matter on that basis rather than on political spin.