A contentious dispute has emerged between former Attorney-General Ayikoi Otoo, who served as counsel for former Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo, and former Auditor-General Daniel Domelovo, a member of the committee that investigated petitions against Madam Torkonoo. At the heart of the disagreement are allegations made by Mr. Domelovo that Mr. Otoo presented "fake evidence" during the committee's proceedings.

Speaking on Joy FM's Top Story on Tuesday, October 7, Mr. Otoo vehemently denied these claims, expressing his astonishment at what he perceived as an increasingly political stance adopted by the former Auditor-General. "I have listened to him; I was surprised at what he is doing. I didn’t know him to be that political, but I see him as only wearing political glasses," Mr. Otoo remarked. He clarified that his earlier comments about audit procedures had been taken out of context. According to Mr. Otoo, an audit report had raised certain issues, which were then clarified by the Judicial Secretary, the spending officer, using the travel policy to explain expenditures. This explanation led to the issuance of a management letter, indicating that the alleged irregular expenditures were no longer concerns, signifying their acceptance.

Mr. Otoo emphasized the availability of this management report for public scrutiny. He questioned Mr. Domelovo's silence during the proceedings when he referenced these well-known audit processes, especially given Mr. Domelovo's experience as a former Auditor-General. Mr. Otoo further stated that even the Director of Finance had confirmed during the proceedings that these matters had not reappeared in the management letter. He expressed bewilderment that despite these facts, Mr. Domelovo and his team subsequently suggested the Chief Justice was implicated in financial impropriety. "How come at the end of it all, you come and tell us that she was not entitled to something? This is the man who should know—he’s the one who understands audit processes and management letters. Yet they ignored all of that and in their report claimed the Chief Justice was involved in some financial irregularity," Mr. Otoo asserted.

Conversely, Mr. Daniel Yao Domelevo maintained his accusation, stating that Mr. Otoo indeed presented fake evidence. Responding to Mr. Otoo's criticism that he sat idly by during what Otoo described as an unfair trial, Mr. Domelevo found the lawyer's comments "interesting." He specifically alleged that one of the documents submitted by Mr. Otoo was a forged letter. "I want to put it on record that he provided us with evidence that were fake evidence," Mr. Domelevo declared. He elaborated on the alleged forgery, stating that the document in question was a letter purportedly signed by the Judicial Secretary claiming to appoint the Chief Justice, an assertion he found highly irregular: "It will interest you to know that it is the junior of the Chief Justice, the judicial secretary who appointed the Chief Justice. That letter he produced is signed by the judicial secretary appointing the Chief Justice."

Beyond the immediate dispute, Mr. Domelevo also voiced broader concerns about the administration's commitment to anti-corruption efforts. He lamented the slow pace of prosecuting corruption cases nine months into President John Dramani Mahama’s administration, expressing dissatisfaction with the lack of visible progress. "I am not satisfied because I can't see the end of the tunnel, not to talk about the light at the end of the tunnel. I can't see it," he remarked. He warned that this lack of speed could lead to a change in government where culprits and their lawyers might hope for "nolle prosequi," causing public funds to be lost and ultimately undermining public confidence in the government's anti-corruption initiatives.