Embattled businessman Alfred Woyome who is contesting the state’s action to retrieve a 47.2m debt says he is ready to cooperate if he loses the case at an Africa court.
The African Court on Human and People’s Rights, based in Arusha, Tanzania is expected to deliver its judgement Friday 10am, determining if his human rights have been abused in a 2010 judgement debt saga.
Already, he has lost the case at the Supreme Court which ordered Thursday, that the state goes ahead to auction listed assets valued at ¢20m to defray the debt.
But speaking on JoyNews’ Upfront, the businessman who has been busy battling the state in court since 2012 indicated he will lay down the avenues of court and now pay up.
“I am ready to sit with government and schedule this” he said and stressed he has never been unwilling to pay. “Debtors must also eat”, he paraphrased a popular local proverb.
He said all of government’s effort to find his properties and sell them off will not be needed if he loses. “I will bring a payment plan”, he said.
Alfred Agbesi Woyome has paid only 4m of a 51.2m judgement debt payment he was ordered to refund in 2014. He rejected accusations he refused to follow through a repayment plan he agreed with the state.
He maintained, he only paused a repayment plan because he had proceeded to the Africa Court of Human Rights to protest the abuse of his rights.
The government, he said, should be ready to abide by the ruling of the court if he on the other hand prevails.
“If I win, and govt does [not abide by the judgment] then there is a coup d’etat against the constitution. This is how serious it is.”
He said Ghana risks being branded a rogue state if it disrespects an unfavourable judgment of the court to which it is a signatory to its treaty.
“Show me one case in which we have disobeyed international law?” he stressed Ghana’s obligation to abide by international laws and conventions.
The businessman said Ghanaians should be concerned if government could infringe on his rights or disrepect the constitution.
“Everything that has been done [against me] is a precedent that can be used against you.”