Lawyer Arraigned Over Alleged GH¢800k Excavator Fraud: A Detailed Analysis

In a high-profile case highlighting the vulnerabilities within Ghana’s heavy equipment trade, a 34-year-old legal practitioner has been arraigned before an Accra Circuit Court. The lawyer, Divine Effah-Dartey, faces allegations of abetting defrauding by false pretenses in a complex transaction involving a purported GH¢800,000 payment for an excavator. This article provides a pedagogical breakdown of the events, the legal framework surrounding the alleged crimes, and the broader implications for commercial transactions in the region.

Introduction

The intersection of legal services and criminal enterprise often creates complex legal challenges. The recent arraignment of Divine Effah-Dartey, a prison practitioner, serves as a stark reminder of the importance of due diligence in high-value transactions. The core of the allegation revolves around a fraudulent scheme where a businessman was allegedly deceived into paying a substantial sum for an excavator that the sellers did not own. This incident not only affects the parties involved but also casts a spotlight on the mechanisms of property fraud and the legal responsibilities of attorneys in Ghana.

As the case progresses through the Accra Circuit Court, it offers a valuable case study for understanding defrauding by false pretenses and the role of abetment in criminal conspiracy. This analysis aims to dissect the events leading to the arraignment, the specific charges leveled against the accused, and the procedural steps currently underway.

Key Points

Background

The sequence of events that led to this legal battle began in late 2025. Kofi Boateng, a businessman looking to expand his operations, sought to purchase an excavator for rental services. The heavy machinery market in Ghana is vibrant but can be opaque to the uninitiated, requiring trusted intermediaries.

The Initial Connection

In September 2025, Boateng was introduced to Mawuli Awadzi Amenyo, a carpenter by trade. Amenyo allegedly acted as a bridge, connecting Boateng to Rishan Mahanta, a figure presented as a legitimate excavator importer operating out of Accra. This introduction is a critical pivot point in the narrative, as it established the chain of trust that was subsequently exploited.

The Inspection and Agreement

On October 1, 2025, Boateng traveled from Asankragwa to Accra to inspect the machinery. The inspection took place at the premises of Caitec Delta Limited. According to prosecution led by Detective Chief Inspector Abel Amanie, Jiang Tao, a warehouse supervisor at the facility, facilitated access to the excavators despite restrictions. Mahanta allegedly presented the machinery as his own.

Following the inspection, an agreement was reached to purchase a Sany hydraulic excavator valued at GH¢1.7 million. Boateng paid an initial installment of GH¢800,000.

The Legal Facade

The transaction took a decisive turn when the parties moved to a law firm in Kaneshie. Here, Divine Effah-Dartey allegedly entered the scene, posing as Mahanta’s legal representative. It is alleged that Effah-Dartey received the GH¢800,000 cash, issued a receipt, and provided an Import Declaration Form purportedly issued by the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA).

Analysis

The legal and factual matrix of this case presents several points of analysis relevant to criminal law and commercial fraud prevention.

Understanding the Charges

The primary charge leveled against the suspects is defrauding by false pretenses. Under Ghanaian law, this offense occurs when a person obtains property by misrepresenting a fact, knowing the representation to be false, with the intent to defraud. In this instance, the prosecution alleges that Mahanta (and by extension, the others) falsely represented ownership of the excavator.

Additionally, Effah-Dartey is charged with abetment. Abetment implies that while he may not have executed the primary act of deception regarding the excavator’s ownership, he aided, encouraged, or facilitated the crime. His role in receiving the funds and providing legal documentation (allegedly forged) is central to this charge.

The Role of Documentation

The provision of an allegedly forged Import Declaration Form is a significant aggravating factor. Documents of this nature are intended to prove the legitimacy of imported goods and the payment of requisite duties. The use of such a document suggests a premeditated effort to lend credibility to a fraudulent transaction. It underscores the necessity for buyers to verify the authenticity of all legal and customs documents directly with the issuing agencies.

Procedural Status

The accused have pleaded not guilty. In the Ghanaian judicial system, this plea triggers the trial phase. The court, presided over by Judge Evelyn Asamoah, has granted bail. Notably, Amenyo was granted bail in the sum of GH¢400,000 with two sureties, one of whom must be justified. Effah-Dartey and Jiang Tao were granted police enquiry bail. The distinction in bail conditions often reflects the perceived severity of the alleged involvement or the flight risk.

Practical Advice

This case serves as a critical lesson for anyone engaging in high-value commercial transactions, particularly in the import and machinery sectors.

Due Diligence in Heavy Equipment Purchases

When purchasing heavy machinery like excavators, visual inspection is insufficient. Buyers should:

• Verify Ownership: Request the original Bill of Lading or proof of purchase from the current seller. Do not rely solely on representations made by a broker.
• Check Serial Numbers: Run serial numbers against manufacturer databases to ensure the machine is not flagged as stolen or under lien.
• Physical Verification of Assets: Ensure the asset is physically located where the seller claims and that there are no third-party claims on the premises.

Verifying Legal Representation

It is common for large transactions to involve lawyers for escrow or contract drafting. However, parties must verify the legitimacy of the lawyer.

• Check the Ghana Legal Association: Verify that the lawyer is in good standing and authorized to practice.
• Direct Contact: If a lawyer claims to represent a seller, contact the law firm through independent channels (publicly listed numbers) rather than relying on contact details provided by the seller.
• Escrow Accounts: Large payments should ideally be lodged into a dedicated escrow account at a reputable bank, rather than direct cash payments to individuals or law firms, unless the firm’s fiduciary capacity is verified.

Red Flags in Transactions

Buyers should be wary of:

• Unusual Pricing: Prices significantly below market rate often indicate stolen goods or a scam.
• Rushed Timelines: Pressure to close deals quickly prevents proper verification.
• Restricted Access: If you are prevented from freely inspecting the goods or the premises (as allegedly happened with Jiang Tao restricting access), walk away immediately.

FAQ

Conclusion

The case involving Divine Effah-Dartey and his co-accused is a developing story that highlights the sophisticated methods used in modern commercial fraud. While the accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty, the allegations underscore the risks inherent in the trade of heavy equipment. For the business community, this serves as a pedagogical moment: the importance of rigorous due diligence cannot be overstated. Verifying ownership, authenticating legal documents, and ensuring transparency in financial transactions are the best defenses against falling victim to similar schemes. As the court adjourns to January 2026, the legal community and the public await the outcome of these serious allegations.