The High Court has granted former Sanitation Minister Cecilia Dapaah's request for an expedited hearing of the case concerning the seizure of her money and the freezing of her bank accounts.

As a result, the court has rescheduled the hearing from its initially slated date of October 18 to tomorrow, October 12.

The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) had previously submitted an application seeking the court's permission to maintain the seizure of a sum of money discovered at Cecilia Dapaah and her husband's residence, as well as to continue freezing her bank accounts.

In response, Ms. Dapaah filed an application requesting the court to expedite the case's hearing.

The legal representatives of Cecilia Dapaah and her husband argued that the application for an expedited hearing was based on the grounds that the delay in the case was causing undue hardships to the respondents.

They also stated that the application for confirmation was a repeated request, and granting their request for an expedited hearing would not prejudice the Office of the Special Prosecutor.

Lawyers from the OSP however opposed the application claiming that Cecilia Dapaah and her husband are seeking to prevent them from “responding to their affidavit in opposition to the substantive application for confirmation of freezing and seizure orders.”

Cecilia Dapaah's legal team, led by Victoria Barth, emphasized that the request for an expedited hearing is additionally based on the Office of the Special Prosecutor's (OSP) failure to provide them with the confirmation application in a timely manner.

The lawyers pointed out that despite their client's notification of her willingness to forgo personal service of the application, which was submitted on September 5, it was not served to them until September 20.

But lawyers from the Special Prosecutor’s office argued that the said request was irregular as their process is “an originating notice on motion which is a process that requires personal service.”

But Cecilia Dapaah’s lawyers opposed this view saying “It cannot be correct that a party is not entitled to waive personal service of a process and to say I have instructed a lawyer to receive on my behalf.”

Cecilia Dapaah also grounds this application on an assertion that the confirmation application filed on September 5 is a repeat of an application that was dismissed on August 31.

According to her lawyers, “On August 8, 2023, the respondent filed an application for the same reliefs as those in their application with the return date of October 18. That earlier application was premised on the same events and information which they seek to rely upon in the second application and that is why I call it a repeat application.”

However, the anti-graft body said this view is based on a misconception.

Lawyers for the OSP indicated that “The substantive application is a fresh process unfettered by any prior considerations. This application is originating from events of September 5 and not on July 24.”

The court, after careful consideration of these arguments, approved the application with a minor adjustment. The confirmation application is now scheduled to be heard on Thursday, October 12, as opposed to the originally proposed date of October 18.

Justice Eric Twum found the previously established timelines for the re-seizure, re-freezing, and the return date to be inequitable. The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) re-seized the money on September 5, 2023, and filed the application six days later on September 11. However, the process was not served on Cecilia Dapaah and her husband until September 20. Surprisingly, the OSP's team had chosen a return date of October 18, which was more than a month after the initial processes were filed.

In light of these circumstances, the judge determined that any further delay in hearing the case would be detrimental to the well-being of the applicants (Cecilia Dapaah and her husband). Therefore, he granted the application to move the confirmation application to October 12 to ensure fairness and expedite the trial.