In June 2019, the National Chairman of National Democratic Congress, Samuel Ofosu Ampofo, was arrested in connection with alleged arson and kidnappings in Ghana. Since his arrest, he has been facing trials in court.
READ MORE: COVID-19: Prez Nana Addo reveals how one worker infected 533 workers with the virus
Mr. Ampofo has however stated that the police has not been fair to him in communicating the conclusion of the issue. In an interview on Happy FM’s ‘Epa Hoa Daben’,he related that the police did not have substantial evidence to back the allegations of kidnapping and arson.
READ MORE: COVID-19: Anyone who shared food along party lines should be ashamed – Cynthia Morrison
“People don’t know the end of the story. So they sit and draw conclusion. I feel like the PR for the police need to tell the public that after questioning Ofosu Ampofo there was no basis for his arrest. They never told Ghanaians so now I need to be telling my own stories”, he stated.
He related: “They showed me photos of two people who they claim had information about the kidnap and burning of market issue. What I know is that when you are arrested for a crime your accusers must be present. But the police came with pictures and when I denied knowing them, they continued that these people met with me between the16th to 20th of April last year. Fortunately, those days coincided with Easter convention and you know I don’t joke with Pentecost Easter Convention. That was about four days. After that I travelled to the UK. So I was not present the period in question. When I gave evidence of my movement that was the end of the case”.
READ MORE: Don’t blame market women for defying social distancing directive-Gender Minister
According to him the police has not been fair to him and as such he expects the police to do the right thing by clearing his name. He promised that his lawyers will follow up with the police on this issue.
He however disclosed that he still goes to court over the issue. However, his lawyers have filed for an appeal in the Supreme Court against a decision by the High Court.
