Beige Bank case: Some charges levelled against Micheal Nyinaku weren’t referred to me for investigations – Investigator to Court

It has emerged at the Financial and Economic Division of the High Court in Accra that some of the charges levelled against the founder of defunct Beige Bank, Mr. Michael Nyinaku, including money laundering of over GHc400 million were not investigated by the case investigator.

At the Financial and Economic Division of the High Court in Accra, it has emerged that some of the charges levelled against the founder of defunct Beige Bank, Mr. Michael Nyinaku, including money laundering of over GHc400 million.

For instance, Mr. Nyinaku who has been accused of siphoning customers’ funds per count 12 was charged with having dishonestly appropriated the sum of GH¢500,000 by causing it to be paid to himself at his Stanbic Bank Account.

However, asked by Defence lawyers led by Thaddeus Sory under further Cross-Examination if his investigation found out how the said transfer being the subject of count 12 was treated or recorded by the Beige Bank, the Investigator answered in the negative.

“There was no case of Stanbic Bank account that was referred to me for investigations,” Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Abednego Atsah, the investigator told the court under cross-examination when asked about the charge against the accused under count 12.

For Count 13, where Mr Nyinaku was charged with having appropriated the sum of GH¢300,000 by causing that amount to be paid to himself, the investigator told the court that, he did not investigate that payment under that count.

“No, my lady. As I earlier indicated, the cases came and were referred to me as and when they came. Those are the very cases on which I wrote my administrative report,” the Investigator again told the court when asked if his investigation found out how the bank treated the amount in question.

Again, the investigator told the court that the charge of money laundering involving an amount of GHc420 million against the accused did not come to him for investigation. His exact words were “I did not work on that.”

The Investigator, ASP Abednego Atsah, the Fifth Prosecution Witness in the ongoing trial had had his Witness Statement given on December 8, 2022 adopted by the Court as his Evidence-in-Chief including various exhibits on July 7.

In his Evidence-in-Chief, as contained in his witness statement to the Court presided over by Justice Afia Serwah Asare-Botwe, a Justice of the Court of Appeal sitting as an additional High Court judge is to corroborate the Prosecution’s charges that have been levelled against Mr. Michael Nyinaku.

Mr. Nyinaku, the founder and Chief Executive Officer of the defunct bank, has been accused of allegedly siphoning customers’ funds and has been charged with stealing GH¢2.1 billion of depositors’ money from the bank.

He has pleaded not guilty to 43 charges including stealing, fraudulent breach of trust and money laundering and has been granted bail.

Below is a Further Cross Examination of PW5 by Mr Sory on July 21, 2023. Q for Question. A for Answer

Q: Please take a look at paragraph 13 of your witness statement, in that paragraph of your witness statement you identify from your investigations two broad categories of transactions which were carried out on the instructions of the accused person, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: The first category of transactions relates to an amount of about 320 million Ghana cedis transferred from the Bank to BCAM on the instructions of the accused person, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: The second category of transaction referred to the sum of about 21 million Ghana Cedis which was transferred to the 10 companies you have testified about in paragraph 6 of your witness statement, is that correct?

A: Yes, my lady, that is correct.

Q: For clarity, the 320 million Ghana Cedis went from BCAM to FASL company, is that correct?

A: That is correct. The account that was opened for FASL.

Q: From that paragraph of your witness statement, you reached the conclusion that the transactions were effected on the instructions of the accused person based on documentation that were made available to you, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: Take a look at paragraph 6 of your witness statement, you confirm that you received statements that were taken from a number of individuals and also documents relating to the transaction, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: And in paragraph 15 of your witness statement, you provide a lot more clarity that the transfers were affected by virtue of internal memos from the finance department of the bank and approved by the accused person, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: You have not made available to the court the background documents which support the transfer of the funds by way of internal memos to show how the funds were transferred from the bank to BCAM?

A: We have those documents and we made photocopies to the office of the Attorney General.

Q: Have you also made available to the Attorney General’s department the internal memos supporting the transfers from BCAM to FASL?

A: Those documents were bulky and we made photocopies and submitted them to the office of the Attorney General.

Q: Did you also make available to the Attorney General the supporting documents by virtue of which the transfers were made from the FASL account to the 10 companies and the two individuals, especially the internal memos

A: All those documents were received from Commercial Crime Unit (CCU) and we made photocopies and submitted same.

Q: You also investigated the ten companies which received the funds from FASL, did you make available to the Attorney General’s office the documents which show what the funds were to be used for?

A: All those documents were received and we made them available.

Mr. Sory: My lady in this trial, what we have seen are bank statements that show debits and credits of funds. The internal memos or correspondences on the basis of which each of those transactions were effected from the Bank to BCAM and from BCAM to FASL and from FASL to the ten companies and the two individuals and the documentation made available by the ten companies and the two individuals have not been made available to in the disclosures.

Mrs. Keelson: When it comes to the transfer of the 320 million. We have actually tendered in evidence all the documents and the internal memos. Everything has been tendered in evidence.

Mr. Sory: My lady we want the internal memos and the approvals that supports the debits and credits in respect of the 320 million Ghana cedis between the bank and BCAM. The second leg is the internal memos and approvals that supports the transfer of funds from BCAM to FASL.

The third one is the internal memos and approvals that support the transfer of funds to the ten companies and the two individuals. Finally, we want the documents made available by the ten companies and the two individuals to the police to explain how the funds were utilized. The two individuals are Evelyn Nana Afia Kyei and Godwin Nordjo.

Mrs. Keelson: My lady the third request which is the internal memos and approvals that support the transfer of funds to the ten companies and the two individuals, I have said that we have tendered these documents and they are in evidence. They are marked as Exhibits K and L series. The rest of the internal memos are statements. I have not come across the rest of the statements counsel is talking about so I will find out.

BY COURT

The prosecution is directed to file all the documents available to them relative to the requests made by 12 noon on 25th July 2023.

Q: From your testimony in this court, it means that there should be about 299 million Ghana Cedis still in the second FASL account and I arrive at this amount from taking the difference from the 320 million that was transferred to that account and about 21 million that were transferred to the ten companies and the two individuals, is that correct?

A: That is correct my lady.

Q: Of the 21 million Ghana Cedis that was transferred to the ten companies and two individuals, about 2 million of it was paid to BIDVEST, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: Then about GH¢80,000 was given to Nana Afia Evelyn Kyei, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: Nana Afia Evelyn Kyei explains to you that she utilized only GH¢18,000 out of that amount, is that correct?

A: If my memory serves me right, she mentioned GH¢20,000 and said it was left with GH¢60,000.

Q: Which was paid back, is that correct?

A: She mentioned that it was still in her account.

Q: But she also added that it was in the custody of the Receiver because it was in the account?

A: That is correct. The account was embargoed.

Q: In respect of Godwin Nordjo, he received GH¢15,000?

A: That is correct.

Q: He explained that it was used for purposes for payments for various people who rendered service to the bank, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: The documents I have just shown you is the letter the Receiver wrote to the CID in connection to the second FASL account, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Mr. Sory: My lady I want to tender the document through the witness

By Court: Any objection?

Mrs. Keelson: My lady we have no objection.

BY COURT

The document is admitted without objection and same is marked as Exhibit 37.

Q: If you look at paragraph 5 of Exhibit 37, the last sentence specifically requests the CID to investigate the payments of this 21 million Ghana Cedis to the ten companies and the two individuals, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: In paragraph 6, the Receiver now sets out ten specific things that he requires the investigation to address, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: The first matter the Receiver wanted you to investigate was the objective for opening that second account, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: In your investigations, the statement of Vanessa Atsu and Susana Philips explained that the second account was a transactional account to enable the BCAM make placements to FASL, is that correct?

A: That is correct. That is what is stated.

Q: Did your investigation reveal anything contrary to this information that was given to you by Susana Philips and Vanessa Atsu?

A: They were the very people that created the accounts and that was exactly what the Receiver sought from us.

Q: The question is, did your investigation reveal anything contrary to this information that was given to you by Susana Philips and Vanessa Atsu?

A: No, my lady.

Q: The second one required you to find specifically why the Know Your Customers (KYC) procedures of the bank were breached in opening that second account?

A: That is correct.

Q: The statement of Thomas Esso confirms that even before he joined BCAM, BCAM was already doing business with FASL?

A: That is correct.

Q: And Yvonne Philips, Susana Philips, Vanessa Atsu all explained in their statements to the police that it was after the Beige Group had acquired the majority shareholding in FASL that the second account was opened?

A: That is so my lady. Their explanation did not factor that the larger shareholding that was being purchased had not been fully paid for as they were awaiting the Bank of Ghana’s approval.

Q: Susana Philips and Vanessa Atsu actually stated in their statements to the police that were designated officials of FASL, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: I am putting it to you that they knew FASL and the KYC requirements that the receiver asked you to investigate was fully satisfied.

A: They were working with FASL as officials of the Beige Group.

Q: I am further putting it to you that in the statement of Susana Philips and Vanessa Atsu to the police, they stated categorically that all the procedures for opening the second FASL account were duly followed.

A: That is so. That is what they stated.

Q: And the third question the receiver required your investigations to address was the person who authorized the opening of the second account, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: And in respect of that third question, Susana Philips and Vanessa Atsu confirmed to you in their statement to the police that it was the CEO of the Beige Group which acquired majority shareholding in FASL who authorized that the account be opened?

A: That is correct.

Q: The Receiver also wanted you to address whether there were any other accounts that were opened, did you find any accounts that were opened?

A: No, my lady.

Q: The Receiver also wanted to find out the reason why they wanted to withdraw the 38 million Ghana Cedis from the second FASL account, is that correct?

A: That is so my lady.

Q: I am referring you to Exhibits AG and AH, AG makes it clear that approval was sought to withdraw the amount for the payment of the fixed-term deposit redemption, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: And Exhibit AH which is the letter requesting the withdrawal makes it clear that the recipient of the amount was BCAM, is that correct?

A: That is correct my lady.

Q: The document I have just handed to you is the statement of Yiadom Boakye Augustine made to the Commercial Crime Unit (CCU) of the CID dated 7th August 2018?

A: That is correct.

Mr. Sory: My lady I want to tender the document through the witness.

By Court: Any objection

Mrs. Keelson: My lady we have no objection.

BY COURT

The document dated 7th August 2018 is admitted without objection and same is marked as Exhibit 38.

Q: If you take a look at the second page of Exhibit 38, from line 17, Yiadom Boakye confirms there that the withdrawal was necessary to meet a redemption in respect of a placement made by BCAM to FASL, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: The Receiver also wanted to know who provided the letterhead of the letter on which the letter for withdrawal of the 38 million Ghana Cedis was written, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: You have testified in this court that Vanesa Atsu and Susana Philips worked with FASL, is that not, correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: I am putting it to you that they, therefore, had access to the letterhead of FASL.

A: That I cannot tell.

Q: The Receiver also wanted to know who signed the letter for withdrawal of the 38 million Ghana Cedis, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: And you found out that it was Vanessa Atsu and Yvonne Philips, is that correct?

A: It was rather Augustine Boakye Yiadom and Yvonne Philips.

Q: Also, the Receiver wanted to know why customer funds were diverted from BCAM and placed in the second FASL account, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: In respect of this particular aspect of your investigation, the statements of Yvonne Philips, Vanessa Atsu, Thomas Esso, Nana Evelyn Afia Kyei all confirmed that it was to enable BCAM make placements with FASL, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: The Receiver also wanted to know who authorized the transfer of about the 21 million Ghana Cedis to the ten companies and the two individuals, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: Did you find out who authorized the 21 million Ghana Cedis to the ten companies and the two individuals?

A: That is so my lady.

Q: You found out who those ten companies and two individuals were, is that not so?

A: That is correct.

Q: Take a look at the charge sheet, if you look at Counts 10 to 34, the accused person is charged with fraudulent breach of trust, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: What it says against the accused person is that, he dishonestly appropriated the sums of money stated in Count 13, 20 to 24 to Sadat Car Accessories, is that correct?

A: I think Sadat Car Accessories is mentioned in only Count 11 out of the counts mentioned.

Q: What it further says is that, the accused person was entrusted with the funds that was transferred by the Bank which he dishonestly appropriated to Sadat Car Accessories?

A: That is correct in the count.

Q: From your investigations, did you find out the process by which the accused person caused this amount to be transferred to Sadat Car Accessories?

A: Yes, my lady.

Q: The accused person made available to you documents that showed also the purpose for which the transfer was made to Sadat Car Accessories?

A: He availed documents to us but I cannot easily recall the exact documents as they came in bulk.

Q: Count 12, the accused person himself is also charged with having dishonestly appropriated the sum of GH¢500,000 by causing it to be paid to himself, i.e., to his Stanbic Bank Account.

A: That is so as captured in the charge sheet.

Q: In your investigations, did you find how the bank treated the transfer of these funds to the accused person?

A: There was no case of Stanbic Bank account that was referred to me for investigations.

Q: In Count 13, the accused person was also charged with having appropriated the sum of GH¢300,000 by causing that amount to be paid to himself?

A: That is correct my lady.

Q: Did you find out how the bank treated that payment to the accused person?

A: No, my lady. As I earlier indicated, the cases came and were referred to me as and when they came. Those are the very cases on which I wrote my administrative report.

Q: In the document you took from the CCU, there were other documents relating to these transactions in respect of which the accused person has been charged with and which were handed over to the Commercial Crime Unit (CCU), are you saying you did not go through them because no specific questions were asked on them?

A: I went through the CCU documents that were presented and those are the documents that related to the profiles of the entities which also had the memos that pointed to the specific transactions on the account.

Q: If you take a look at Counts 15 and 17, they charge the accused person with having dishonestly appropriated the sum of One Million and 6.5 million Ghana cedis respectively by causing the said sums of money to be paid to Dr. Oteng Anane, is that correct?

A: That is so my lady.

Q: You investigated the case of the payment of Dr. Oteng Anane?

A: That is so my lady.

Q: From your witness statement, you confirm from both the accused and Dr. Oteng Anane that Dr. Oteng Anane had advanced loans to the accused person?

A: That is so my lady.

Q: He provided the loan agreement to prove it, is that correct?

A: Yes, My Lady. He provided loan agreement.

Q: So, the loan agreement fully confirmed the relationship between the accused and Dr. Oteng regardless of the discrepancy in the dates you identified in your witness statement, I am putting that to you.

A: That is correct.

Q: You also confirm in your witness statement that the accused person caused the bank to repay these loans on his behalf, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: In repaying loans to Dr. Oteng on his behalf, per your investigations, it was confirmed that it was recorded in the shareholders account, is that correct?

A: That is correct.

Q: You are aware that the accused person is a shareholder of the bank?

A: That is correct.

Q: I am putting it to you that by recording it in the shareholders account, the bank had acknowledged that it was debt owed by its shareholder who is the accused person to the Bank.

A: That is correct.

Q: From your administrative report, I do not see any investigations relating to the following entities and individuals, Casewell Capital Partners, Mugreba Company Limited, Mugriba Ventures, Judith Aidoo, Joyce Ababio, and AM Car Rental, does that mean you did not investigate any matters affecting these companies?

A: I did invite some of those people and some came to us and that was later.

Q: These people provided statements and documentation to you prove why these payments were made to them, is that correct?

A: Those who came did so.

Q: So, did Mugreba Company Limited come?

A: I have to confirm because those cases came up when AG’s team were working on the docket so I had to quickly invite those people when the list was sent to me. Those whom we had, we obtained statements from them and those who had documents availed such documents to us which I sent by dispatch to the team that was working on them. That is how come our administrative report did not capture those ones.

Q: Can you on the next adjourned date check those you invited and obtained statements from?

A: Yes, my lady.

Q: In Counts 43, the accused person is charged with money laundering because he transferred the sums indicated in that count to BCAM for purposes of assisting him to dishonestly appropriate the said funds?

A: That is correct.

Q: In your investigation, did the accused person make available to you documentation to explain the basis for the transfer of the funds to BCAM?

A: On Count 43, No my lady.

Q: Did your investigations reveal how the transfer was made?

A: 425 million No. I did not work on that.

Q: In Counts 33 and 34, the accused person is charged with having been dishonestly appropriated the sums indicated in those counts by causing the said sums to be transferred to BCAM, is that correct?

A: That is so my lady.

Q: Did your investigations reveal how those sums of money were transferred to BCAM?

A: No, my lady.

Q: But was it part of your investigations?

A: I think the Counts 33 and 34 quote the same amounts which I said that did not come to me for investigations.

BY COURT

The witness is sealed at this stage. The case is adjourned to Friday 28th July, 2023 for continuation. After that, the parties’ lawyers agree that a warrant be applied for to sit on 1st and 2nd August 2023 to allow for Mr. Sory to complete his cross-examination if need be.