Richard Jakpa’s 2007 military dismissal letter cited as evidence in ongoing ambulance trial

It was revealed that businessman Richard Jakpa, who is currently on trial for causing a financial loss of €2.37 million to the state in an ambulance deal, was dismissed from the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF) in 2007 for “unsatisfactory conduct,” in a dramatic turn of events at the Accra High Court.

Deputy Attorney-General Alfred Tuah-Yeboah introduced a dismissal letter from the GAF into evidence during the cross-examination of Jakpa on Thursday, June 27, 2024.

The letter, which was initially contested by Jakpa’s lawyers, was admitted by Justice Afia Serwah Asare-Botwe, who noted that Jakpa had already acknowledged the document and could address its contents.

The dismissal letter, signed by the late Brigadier General M.K.G. Ahiaglo, the then Commander of the Southern Command, cited Jakpa’s failure to meet promotion standards, consistent fraudulent behaviour, and general indiscipline.

Jakpa, who was a Lieutenant, also had a history of indebtedness to various individuals and institutions, including a prolonged debt to Recce Regt PRI.

The letter described Jakpa as a “bad example by all standards,” highlighting a special report from 2004 that suggested he had reached his professional ceiling, and a subsequent report from his commanding officer describing his conduct as “shameful and regrettable.”

The GAF decided that his continued service was not in its best interest and discharged him under Article 15 of the Armed Forces Regulations.

During the trial, Deputy Attorney-General Tuah-Yeboah asked Jakpa to identify the designation on the official seal of the letter. Jakpa claimed the writing was not legible, sparking further questions about the integrity of the document.

Jakpa also testified that the government breached the ambulance deal contract by establishing Letters of Credit (LC) directly to Big Sea instead of his company, Jakpa at Business.Nonetheless, he argued that this breach absolved his company of any responsibility for the financial loss incurred by the state, prompting him to initiate a civil suit. The Commercial Division of the High Court later ruled that all LCs should be established in Jakpa’s name.

Under cross-examination, Jakpa admitted that a 28.7% portion of the transaction amount was allocated to his company but stated he was unaware of the exact nominal figure.

The trial continues as the court examines the implications of Jakpa’s past conduct on his current legal challenges.