Sedina Tamakloe Acquitted! Court of Appeal's Stunning Ruling Rocks Ghana's Judiciary

In a landmark judgment delivered on July 30, 2026, the Court of Appeal in Ghana unanimously set aside all 78 convictions against former Microfinance and Small Loans Centre (MASLOC) Chief Executive Officer, Sedina Christine Tamakloe Attionu. This ruling overturned an Accra High Court's decision from April 2024, which had found Ms. Tamakloe Attionu guilty of multiple corruption-related charges, including stealing, causing financial loss to the state, money laundering, and improper payment of public funds, sentencing her to 10 years' imprisonment with hard labour. Ms. Tamakloe Attionu had been extradited from the United States in June 2026 to begin serving her sentence, having previously absconded in 2021 during her trial, which then continued in absentia.

The three-judge panel, comprising Justice Emmanuel Ankamah, Justice S. Diawuo, and Justice E. S. Amedahe, meticulously examined each charge and the evidence presented by the prosecution. The Court's central finding, detailed in a judgment running to 124 numbered paragraphs, was that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt and that the trial judge had repeatedly and erroneously shifted the burden of proof from the prosecution to the accused. Justice Ankamah emphasized in his concluding remarks that the rule requiring the prosecution to prove guilt, and barring that burden from shifting to the accused, "is the constitutional expression of the presumption of innocence, and it is owed to every accused."

Several key charges against Ms. Tamakloe Attionu were dismissed due to significant evidential gaps and legal shortcomings. For the GH¢500,000 Obaatanpa Microfinance Company refund, the prosecution's primary evidence—a letter (Exhibit A) acknowledging receipt—was deemed unauthenticated. Ms. Tamakloe Attionu had stated she "cannot vouch that the letter was signed by me," and the Court found that the prosecution failed to prove its genuineness under the Evidence Act. Furthermore, MASLOC's own correspondence contradicted the theft claim, as it continued to demand interest payments on the GH¢500,000 investment for years after the alleged refund, with no internal acknowledgment of a cash refund having come in and gone missing.

The charges related to the alleged theft of over GH¢2 million meant for a nationwide sensitisation programme also collapsed. The prosecution's case, claiming the programme never happened, relied on hearsay evidence from MASLOC Regional Directors who did not testify in court. Crucially, the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) investigator admitted under cross-examination that no attempt was made to contact any of the 85,300 listed beneficiaries. Additionally, several MASLOC staff interviewed by investigators, who had handled programme funds, never stated that the programme did not occur.

Another charge, concerning the alleged stealing of GH¢579,800 from a disaster relief fund for victims of the 2015 Kantamanto market fire, was also dismissed. The Court found it unusual that the prosecution's own lead witness—Ms. Tamakloe Attionu's successor as MASLOC CEO—testified under cross-examination that inquiries had confirmed the money had reached the fire victims through the intended channel. This crucial admission was notably absent from the official investigation report tendered in court.

Beyond specific evidence issues, a batch of charges alleging Ms. Tamakloe Attionu "wilfully caused financial loss to the state" and "caused loss to public property" were found to be defective. The Court held that these charges merely repeated legal conclusions without describing any specific act or decision by Ms. Tamakloe Attionu that supposedly caused the loss, thus failing to provide her with a detailed case to answer as required by Ghana's Constitution. Similarly, convictions for improper ex gratia and leave payments to herself and her deputy were set aside, as MASLOC's Head of Finance had testified to personally reviewing and authorizing these payments based on valid supporting documents, with no evidence that Ms. Tamakloe Attionu deceived him or supplied false paperwork.

The Court also addressed charges related to a disputed vehicle procurement contract worth approximately GH¢61.7 million with Mac Autos. It noted that the Ministry of Finance had confirmed the financing arrangement to the Public Procurement Authority, and critically, Ms. Tamakloe Attionu's successor as CEO later renegotiated and paid out the same contract in 2017 and 2018, which the Court found hard to reconcile with a claim of improper procurement from the outset. Furthermore, the prosecution failed to prove that the required approval for these procurements had been withheld or to identify precisely how Ms. Tamakloe Attionu breached any specific verification procedure.

As the underlying theft and financial-loss convictions fell due to lack of proof, the related money laundering charges, which legally depend on an underlying unlawful activity, also collapsed. With every conviction quashed, the Court deemed the complaint that her original ten-year sentence was too harsh as moot, as there was no valid conviction left to sentence her for. The Court also rejected the Republic's argument that Ms. Tamakloe Attionu, being a fugitive at the time of filing her appeal, should be barred from challenging her convictions, affirming a person's right to appeal even when convicted in absentia and within the required timeframe.

The judgment has sparked significant public and political reactions. Franklin Cudjoe, Founder and President of IMANI Africa, voiced strong concerns about the ruling's implications for Ghana's anti-corruption fight, suggesting it could weaken public confidence and send a signal that public officials might escape accountability if their political party returns to power. He critically described the outcome as a "setback" for the country's anti-corruption efforts, likening it to a "Witches' dance, two steps forward, four steps backwards." The New Patriotic Party (NPP) echoed these sentiments, with National Organiser Henry Nana Boakye accusing Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Dr. Dominic Ayine, of presenting a "weak defence" and alleging political motivation behind the acquittal. He questioned how a "mountain of evidence" could fail to secure a conviction, hinting at "fear hovering over the Judiciary."

Despite the Court of Appeal's ruling, the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Dr. Dominic Ayine, has announced that the State will appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, insisting on upholding accountability. Earlier, the Attorney-General's Department had informed the Court of Appeal in written submissions dated April 1, 2026, that the record of appeal was incomplete, lacking all prosecution exhibits tendered during the trial and containing only some disclosure documents. Meanwhile, a different three-member panel of the Court of Appeal, comprising Justice Sophia Rosetta Bernasko-Essah, Justice Dr Ernest Owusu-Dapaa, and Justice Ayitey Armah-Tetteh, has indefinitely adjourned without delivering a ruling on the State's separate application for a stay of execution pending the determination of the substantive appeal, further prolonging the legal proceedings in this high-profile case. The Court emphasized that an acquittal only means the specific criminal offences were not proved beyond reasonable doubt, not necessarily that every transaction was proper, prudent, or administratively defensible.