This case revolves around Abdul Hayyu Oudou, a Ghanaian businessman accused of defrauding Gao Yao, a Chinese businessman residing in Ghana, of a significant sum of money totaling GH¢1,141,510 and US$1,900. The alleged fraud transpired during a business transaction involving the procurement of oil and painting materials from suppliers based in China and Singapore. Oudou, operating a forex business at Rawlings Park in Accra, presented himself as a facilitator for the international transfer of funds, offering to remit the payments to Sinopec Lubricant Singapore PTE Ltd. and Shanghai Janhong New Material Technology Co. Ltd. on behalf of Gao Yao. Trusting Oudou’s representation, Gao Yao handed over the stipulated amount, only to later discover the disheartening truth that the suppliers had not received any payment.
The unfolding narrative suggests a calculated deception on Oudou’s part. Upon receiving the funds from Gao Yao on May 17, 2023, Oudou furnished the complainant with what appeared to be swift receipts, purporting to confirm the successful transfer of the money through Guaranty Trust Bank Ghana Ltd. These receipts, however, later proved to be counterfeit, exposing the fraudulent nature of the transaction. The revelation of the fabricated receipts shattered Gao Yao’s trust and prompted him to file a formal complaint with the police, leading to Oudou’s subsequent arrest.
The legal proceedings against Oudou commenced with his appearance before an Accra Circuit Court, presided over by Mrs. Evelyn Asamoah. The charges leveled against him centered on defrauding by false pretences, a serious offense under Ghanaian law. Oudou pleaded not guilty to the charges, maintaining his innocence throughout the initial court appearance. Despite his plea, the court granted him bail in the sum of GH¢2 million, a substantial amount reflecting the gravity of the alleged crime. The bail conditions also included the provision of four sureties, three of whom are required to be gainfully employed, adding a layer of accountability to ensure his appearance in court.
Further stipulations imposed by the court included the mandatory deposit of Oudou’s passport at the Court’s Registry. This measure serves to restrict his international travel, mitigating the risk of flight and ensuring his availability for subsequent court proceedings. The case has been adjourned until August 12, 2025, providing ample time for the prosecution, led by Chief Inspector Ebenezer Teye Okuffo, to gather and present all relevant disclosures. This extended timeframe underscores the commitment to a thorough and meticulous investigation, allowing both the prosecution and the defense to prepare their cases effectively.
During the ongoing investigation, Oudou offered an explanation for his actions, albeit one that raises further questions. He claimed to have entrusted the funds to an individual identified only as “Frank,” asserting that this individual was responsible for processing the payments. According to Oudou’s account, the counterfeit swift receipts were also received from this elusive “Frank.” However, Oudou’s narrative is weakened by his inability to provide any concrete information about “Frank’s” whereabouts or identity, hindering the police’s efforts to verify his claims and locate this purported intermediary.
The prosecution’s case hinges on demonstrating Oudou’s intent to deceive and the resulting financial loss suffered by Gao Yao. The counterfeit swift receipts serve as crucial evidence, indicating a deliberate attempt to mislead the complainant. Oudou’s inability to provide verifiable information about “Frank” further strengthens the prosecution’s position, casting doubt on his claims of innocence. The defense, on the other hand, will likely focus on challenging the prosecution’s evidence and attempting to establish reasonable doubt regarding Oudou’s culpability. The extended timeframe until the next court appearance allows both sides to build their cases and present compelling arguments before the court. Ultimately, the court will weigh the evidence presented and determine the veracity of the allegations against Oudou, rendering a verdict that reflects the principles of justice and fairness.
