Mr Amidu has declared that the evidence exposes the truth, challenging the OSP’s claims that the raid was a staged or imposter event.

“The CCTV images have turned the tables on the Special Prosecutor, Parliament, and the President,” he said, emphasising that the footage unequivocally proves that the invasion was carried out by state security operatives.

According to him, this directly contradicts his successor’s statement that “the purported raid on Mr Ofori-Atta’s residence was staged or at best an imposter action in an attempt to court disfavour for the OSP and to derail the investigation.”

Mr Amidu lambasted the OSP for attempting to shift the blame onto Ofori-Atta, who was not even in the country at the time of the raid.

“This narrative appeared to carry the morning, but for the fact that the victim was not an ordinary Ghanaian without the means to own a CCTV system installed in his home.”

The video footage, he maintained, exposed the falsehoods in the OSP’s claims and left the government with no room to deny its involvement.

The former Attorney General also criticized Parliament for trivialising the invasion instead of debating the grave violation of Ofori-Atta’s fundamental human rights.

“Rather than holding the perpetrators accountable, Parliament engaged in political point-scoring,” he remarked.

He further condemned Majority Leader Mahama Ayariga’s attempt to brush the matter aside with a mere admission that the raid was “most regrettable and unfortunate.”

The former Special Prosecutor directed his criticism at President John Mahama, arguing that as the head of state and the chairman of the National Security Council, he bears ultimate responsibility for the actions of security operatives under his command.

“The burden is now upon the President to admit that he ordered the invasion or that it was conducted on his blind side. Either way, the nation demands accountability,” he declared.

He also highlighted a disturbing pattern of executive overreach, drawing parallels between this incident and the 2002 invasion of the late President John Evans Atta Mills’ residence under the John Agyekum Kufuor administration.

“The repeat of such impunity twenty-two years down the line must not go unpunished under President Mahama’s watch,” Martin Amidu warned.

“If he really intends to reset this country forward and not backward, he must act decisively.”

Additionally, Mr Amidu raised concerns about the involvement of Richard Jakpa, who, according to parliamentary disclosures, allegedly led the invasion of Ken Ofori-Atta’s home.

“The coincidence of the alleged emergence of Richard Jakpa’s presence in the operation and the OSP casting Ofori-Atta as the orchestrator of the event suggests a collaboration between the Office of the National Security Coordinator and the OSP,” he noted.

He insisted that an independent and impartial investigation is necessary to uncover the truth behind the raid.

The former Attorney General did not spare Ghana’s Vice-President, whom he accused of abdicating her responsibilities in the absence of the President.

“Bawku burned while Mahamudu Bawumia slept under the Akufo-Addo government. Today, our rights and freedoms are under attack while the sitting Vice-President remains silent,” he lamented.

Mr Amidu ended his critique with a call for accountability, insisting that those responsible for the unlawful invasion must be brought to justice.

“Ghana must reset forward, not backwards to yesteryears. That is what the electorate voted for, and no media psyops can deflect the enormity of such unlawful acts by government assets and agents,” he concluded.

ALSO READ:

• Raid in Ofori-Atta’s home was staged – OSP reveals
• Afenyo-Markin condemns raid on Ofori-Atta’s home

• CCTV images of alleged raid in Ken Ofori-Atta’s home emerge

Former Special Prosecutor, Martin Amidu has pointed out that this assertion ignores a crucial precedent set by Professor John Evans Atta Mills, who was the Vice President and presidential candidate for the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in the 2000 election runoff.

On December 29, 2000, a day after the election and before the official announcement by Electoral Commission Chairman Dr. Kwadwo Afari-Gyan on December 30, Prof. Mills voluntarily conceded defeat to his opponent, Mr. John Agyekum Kufuor of the New Patriotic Party (NPP).

His act of statesmanship was widely recognized by Mr. Kufuor and the Electoral Commission, marking a significant moment in Ghana’s democratic development.

Dr. Bawumia, whose family had strong ties to the NDC during this period, cannot reasonably claim to be unaware of this historical event. His father, who served as Chairman of the Council of State, was actively involved in the political processes of the time.

While some diplomats and clergy may not be familiar with this electoral history, the facts remain clear.

Prof. Mills’ conduct serves as a powerful reminder of the political maturity necessary to ensure peaceful transitions and uphold Ghana’s democratic values.

Read Mr. Martin Amidu’s full statement below:

BAWUMIA NOT THE FIRST INCUMBENT CANDIDATE TO CONCEDE DEFEAT
BEFORE THE DECLARATION OF RESULTS IN GHANA: BY MARTIN A. B. K. AMIDU

The historical facts contradict the reconstruction of the image of Vice President Mahamudu
Bawumia as being the first incumbent presidential candidate in the history of the Fourth
Republic to have conceded defeat to an opposition presidential candidate before the formal
declaration of the presidential results by the Electoral Commission (EC).
Professor John Evans Atta Mills, then Vice President and incumbent presidential candidate of
the National Democratic Congress (NDC) at the 2000 presidential runoff election on 28
December 2000 conceded defeat to the opposition New Patriotic Party’s presidential
candidate, Mr. John Agyekum Kufuor the next day, 29 December 2000, before the formal
declaration of the results of the election on Saturday, 30 December 2000 by Dr. Kwadwo
Afari-Gyan the Chairman of the then Electoral Commission. The graciousness of Professor
Mills’ gesture was acknowledged first by Mr. John Agyekum Kufuor after Prof. Mills had
telephoned him to concede defeat and to congratulate him as the winner of the presidential
election on 29 December 2000, and by the Electoral Commission in formally declaring the
results of the runoff elections the next day.
Twenty-four years down the line, the hazards and vicissitudes of life have made memories
deem for disingenuous politicians like Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia who had a vested interest in
the outcome of the 2000 presidential election by virtue of the membership of his parents in
the NDC to pretend not to remember Prof. Mills’ unparalleled gesture of statesmanship on 29
December 2000. Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia had himself just returned to the country after his
father the Chairman of the Council of State had gotten him employed at the Bank of Ghana
and cannot claim to have forgotten the historical event so soon at his current age.
The Dean of the Diplomatic Corps who ironically is from Lebanon, the European Union
Ambassador, a Ghanaian-American Archbishop resident in the USA, and others who might
be ignorant of the electoral history of Ghana under the 1992 Constitution may be forgiven for
crediting Dr. Mahamaudu Bawumia with being the first candidate to concede defeat to and to
congratulate his opponent. But Dr. Bawumia who had a vested interest in the 2000 elections
by virtue of his late father’s position within the NDC as the Chairman of the Council of State
could not, therefore, have forgotten that Professor Mills conceded defeat to and congratulated
Mr. Kufuor soon after the results of the runoff election indicated that the New Patriotic Party
(NPP) had won the elections in order to diffuse tensions and allow for a smooth transition of
power to the NPP.
I had heard some self-appointed men of God peddling the same disinformation,
misinformation and fake news of Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia being the first incumbent
presidential candidate to concede defeat to his opponent before the EC could declare the
results of elections under the 1992 Constitution as a sign of democratic credentials of
statesmanship, commitment to democracy and good governance. I had decided to ignore
those assertions as coming from persons seeking cheap popularity, ingratiating themselves to
the lame duck government, and seeking to project Dr. Bawumia for a second bite at the
cherry at the 2028 presidential elections.

But to hear Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia himself asserting that he conceded defeat early to quell
assertions that the election was being rigged, which could have led to violence was to turn the
facts and truth on their heads that needed to be responded to immediately. The inerasable
truth is that Dr. Bawumia is not the first incumbent Vice President and presidential candidate
to concede defeat to his opponent under the 1992 Constitution to reduce electoral tensions in
an atmosphere charged with suspicion of the ruling government intending to rig presidential
elections. Dr. Bawumia was, therefore, exhibiting the highest degree of lack of integrity and
honour when he asserted that:
“Even though the Electoral Commission had not yet pronounced, in fact, some of my people
in my team were saying you can’t go out to concede, we don’t know if all this data is right,
let’s wait. And all of that. I said, look, we know this data is right from our own system, you
know, so if you wait, you build up more tension and violence could come because people
would think we are trying to rig the election.
Because that is the message that is coming, that we are trying to rig the election. But nobody
has ever conceded an election without the EC coming out to pronounce. And I said there’s a
first time for everything. For the interest of the peace and stability of our country, I will come
out, I’ll be the first person to concede even before the EC comes out.” (Emphasis supplied)
I have had occasion to call Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia an opportunist, a pretender, a clone, and
a poodle of lame duck President Nana Akufo-Addo because he has through association
mimicked the latter’s rhetorical style, deliberately spreading disinformation and/or
misinformation and outright untruths as eternal truths. I have no respect for anybody with a
claim to learning and scholarship who thinks that the higher educational capabilities his
parents have endowed him with are intended to be used to cheat the intelligence of the
electorate who have been less endowed. Coming from somebody from the former Northern
Territories (NT) where most of us are first generation educated persons from illiterate parents
who sent us to school to come out to assist our less fortunate teaming illiterate siblings is
unacceptable to me.
Anybody who followed the electoral history of 7 December 2024 presidential election after
the polls closed will know that the National Communications Officer of the NDC had, before
Dr. Bawumia came out to concede defeat to former President John Dramani Mahama, called
a press conference at which he had informed the media of the electoral trends as they had
unfolded from the constituencies and regions of Ghana. Doubting Thomas’ can listen to what
Mr. Sammy Gyamfi said at the press conference on 8 December 2024 long before Dr.
Bawumia conceded on YouTube: #Election2024: It was a landslide victory – Sammy Gyamfi.
When Dr. Bawumia who admittedly had the same data Sammy Gyamfi had was delaying in
conceding defeat, the NDC National Communication Officer urged Dr. Bawumia to do the
needful to avoid tension as captured on Tik Tok: 2024 Elections: Sammy Gyamfi Urges Dr.
Bawumia to Concede | TikTok. Where is the spontaneity about Dr. Bawumia’s statesmanship?
Former President John Agyekum Kufuor, the presidential candidate of the NPP, and I, the
running mate to Vice President John Evans Atta Mills at the 2000 presidential elections
runoff, are the only surviving direct participating candidates in the final act of the 2000
presidential runoff elections to speak out authoritatively against the lies being peddled that

Bawumia is the first incumbent candidate under the 1992 Constitution to concede defeat to
his opponent before the formal declaration of the results by the EC. Mr. Kufuor is a sore
looser with Dr. Bawumia at the 2024 presidential elections and has no interest in challenging
the false narrative of Dr. Bawumia and his clique of likeminded disinformation and fake news
salesmen are peddling to the electorate. I have, therefore, a responsibility and a duty to set the
records straight by credible and cogent evidence of the 2000 runoff presidential elections held
on Thursday, 28 December 2000 in which Prof Mills and I lost to Mr. Kufuor of the NPP who
was very vindictive in victory and during the eight years of his governance.
On Friday 29 December 2000, the Vice-President Professor John Evans Atta Mills who was
the NDC incumbent presidential candidate for the 2000 presidential election conceded defeat
to the NPP presidential candidate Mr. John Agyekum Kufuor in the runoff election that was
held on Thursday, 28 December 2000. He was reported by the Associated Press as having
issued “a statement Friday saying it was clear that John Agyekum Kuffuor (sic) had won
Thursday’s vote to succeed President Jerry Rawlings, …..” The news report stated further that:
“Mills congratulated Kuffuor (sic)” and quoted Mills as saying that: “As an outgoing
government, we pledge to make his transition into office as smooth as possible.”
The reaction of the NPP presidential candidate-elect and others was reported as follows:
‘Kuffuor (sic), a British-trained lawyer and longtime politician, thanked Mills for his
“graciousness” and pledged to cooperate with his National Democratic Congress. And U.N.
Secretary-General Kofi Annan (news – web sites), a Ghana native, commended the country’s
leaders and voters for “the transparent and peaceful manner in which the elections were
conducted. With these elections, Ghana has demonstrated that democracy and its institutions
continue to take root in Africa,” he said in a statement read by deputy U.N. spokesman
Manoel de Almeida e Silva.’
The Associated Press reporting on the news which was carried by Ghana Web on 30
December 2000 underscored the historical importance of Professor Mills’ act of conceding
defeat at the polls as follows: “Ghana’s vice president has conceded defeat to an opposition
leader in the country’s presidential election, signaling (sic) an orderly transition after a vote
notable as much for the way it was held as for its result.”
Ghana News Agency reported Professor Mills as follows: “I would like on behalf of the
(ruling) National Democratic Congress (NDC) and its millions of supporters, to congratulate
Mr Kufuor most warmly for his electoral victory. .. We wish him and the New patriotic Party
(NPP) well, both in the Executive and in the Legislature.”
GNA stated further in its reportage that: “The electoral commission said it would formally
announce the final results of Thursday’s run-off by mid-morning on Saturday.” Adding that:
‘Mills pledged to make Kufuor’s “transition into office as smooth as possible”.’
The Electoral Commission in formally announcing and declaring the results of the 2000
Presidential elections later acknowledged the graciousness of Vice-President Mills: “We
wish to congratulate Professor Mills particularly for the manner in which he has taken the
loss,” Commission Chairman Kwadwo Afari-Djan said. He stated further that: “Professor

Mills is a fine gentleman and it is gracious of him to have conceded defeat. That is what is
expected in a democracy.”
Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia might have been labouring under the delusion of the fact that in the
runoff presidential elections of 2008 Nana Akufo-Addo and him reluctantly conceded defeat
after the declaration of the presidential election results by the EC in words that negated good
will on their part as his benchmark for claiming now to be the first incumbent candidate to
concede defeat before the EC declared the results. Ghana Web reported the condition and
caveats under which Nana Akufo-Addo and Bawumia conceded defeat to Prof. Mills and
John Dramani Mahama on 3 January 2009 in a news report under: Akufo-Addo concedes
defeat for those who wish to read the caveats and conditions. One may ask Dr. Bawumia what

he made of the fact that the incumbent President of Ghana conceded defeat to Nana Akufo-
Addo and him at the 2016 presidential elections before the declaration of results by the EC in

those elections. France 24 with sources as Associated Press reported that President John
Dramani Mahama conceded defeat before the EC declared the election thus: Ghanaian
President Mahama concedes defeat to opposition leader Akufo-Addo for doubting Thomas’ to
read for themselves.
I have taken the trouble to be detailed in establishing the facts and evidence pointing
irrevocable to the fact that Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia was economical with the truth to have
claimed exceptionalism for conceding defeat to President-elect John Dramani Mahama in the
history of the 1992 Constitution’s electoral history. Dr. Bawumia has prospects for the future
if the NPP will after the mess Nana Akufo-Addo and he have brought the NPP into during
their eight years of disinformation, misinformation, and rhetorical deception decide to retain
him as their presidential candidate in future presidential elections. The one touch results of
the 2024 presidential elections, however, demonstrates that Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia needs to
reconstruct his image from being Nana Akufo-Addo’s clone and poodle to a true Alhaji
Mumuni Bawumia son with the cultural and moral integrity of the original NT tradition to be
acceptable to the electorate in Ghana. The survival of the 1992 Constitution is anchored upon
political integrity that puts Ghana First and not upon political deception that considers Ghana
as expendable.
Martin A. B. K. Amidu
27 December 2024

Download PDF

The determination of President Nana Akufo-Addo to use all the means of state power at his disposal to deny you any chance of a free, fair and transparent election that would allow the electorate to voluntarily choose their next President was self-evident in rhetoric, action and deed even to the last hour of the vote.

The wise decision of the Ghanaian electorate in electing you with a massive vote in the first round of voting as our President was a demonstration of their determination to disabuse the minds of the political elite, deep state apparatus, the incumbent government and its presidential candidate of the presumption that the ordinary Ghanaian is a zombified yokel without common sense to make impassioned decisions based on his national self-interest in the face of incumbency incentives dangled before him just before elections.

The purposeful decision of the Ghanaian electorate not to create any situation for a run-off Presidential election shows the appreciation of the electorate of the dynamics of politics when faced with a government which has wantonly abused the trust they placed in it almost eight years to the date of the election on 7 December 2024.

The fact that the Ghanaian electorate made you, John Dramani Mahama, President-elect, the beneficiary of their decision and vote underscores their belief that you have learnt lessons from past mistakes as President of Ghana and they can trust you to clean the mess the President Akufo-Addo/Bawumia government has accumulated despite the promises and hopes held out to Ghanaians when they gave the pair the Presidency with their votes eight years ago.

President-elect, John Dramani Mahama, I congratulate you with all my mind, heart, and soul for your perseverance and for this victory that will allow you to make a positive and beneficial impact on the lives of the ordinary citizens on the streets as President of the Republic of Ghana. There is great enthusiasm and hope in the air for the people of Ghana, the ECOWAS sub-region and Africa in general for the peaceful election and change of government at the ballot box as portending an African renaissance of good governance under your leadership.

I have no doubt that as the President-elect you are aware that the people of Ghana expect your new government to conduct an audit of what brought the economy of Ghana into a mess and generated intense suffering for the ordinary Ghanaian while the government and its political elite lived a good life. You promised them to open the books to have the people informed of how their resources were used during the past eight years to instil probity, transparency and accountability in Government as demanded by the 1992 Constitution.

Your victory is mainly due to the confidence the people have in you to entrust to you their mandate to clean the ongoing economic mess and get our looted monies back to the Republic of Ghana in the shortest possible time. I pray that upon your assumption of office on January 7, 2025, you will as the President of Ghana with your Government, and the new Parliament of Ghana reciprocate the trust and confidence reposed in you at these elections by getting our looted monies back in the shortest possible time. The Agyapa Royalties Transactions which Parliament was promised on oath in 2021 will be investigated under the Nana Akufo-Addo/Bawumia government is still waiting for your government. Ghanaians are watching what kind of clean unsullied institutions you will use to fight corruption and economic crimes.

It is my hope that in endeavouring to fulfil your promises to the people of Ghana, particularly in auditing the past you will use state institutions that are independent, impartial, and professional in the discharge of their assignments underpinned by the presumption of innocence which every Ghanaian is entitled to under the 1992 Constitution. Fanfare and trials in the court of public opinion demean professionalism in auditing and investigations as instruments of impartial justice.

The landslide victory you were given at the polls exhibits the trust and the expectations of the electorate in and from you. May your experience, lessons learnt from the past, and diligence enable you to carry all Ghanaians along as their President including those who did not vote for you. This is the only way for you to leave a legacy of a government determined to achieve the common purpose of rebuilding a strong, motivated and united Ghana that will demonstrate the expected leadership on the African continent and the world at large. May God guide, guard, and bless you in the difficult task ahead to always put Ghana First.

According to him, although the former President is not a saint, he has the experience needed to address the issues created by the Akufo-Addo administration.

“John Dramani Mahama is not a saint, but he is nobody’s poodle. He has the experience, as a former president, to audit the mess that the Nana Akufo-Addo/Bawumia government will leave behind,” Amidu stated.

He acknowledged having had differences with John Mahama in the past but emphasized that Mahama possesses the experience required to ensure probity and accountability in the country.

“I have had problems with John Dramani Mahama in the past, which are documented on my website. The constitutional situation on our hands, however, demands pragmatism to ensure probity and accountability after an eight-year tenure of government. We need a candidate who can command a sizeable parliamentary representation to actualize an audit of the previous government,” he added.

In one of his epistles, released three days before the 2024 general election, Amidu alleged that President Akufo-Addo fears being audited by John Mahama.

He, therefore, urged Ghanaians to vote against the NPP on December 7 to protect the country’s constitution.

“John Dramani Mahama, whose audit Nana Akufo-Addo fears, ought to be the best bet for the integrity of the 1992 Constitution in our present circumstances. The 1992 Constitution does not enshrine dynasty or inheritance by cronyism, and that is why the electorate should aim for a change in government on 7 December 2024, to defend and preserve the Constitution of our Fourth Republic. Ghana must always come first,” Amidu emphasized.

He further dismissed the candidacy of Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, stating, “I cannot, as a person born in the then NT, recommend Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia as a person with the traits of honesty, integrity, and selfless service exhibited by our forebears from the NT to the Republic of Ghana, to be elected on 7 December 2024 as president, symbolizing a representation of northerners on an NPP ticket for Ghana.”

Amidu, who previously served as Attorney General under an NDC government, has been an outspoken critic of President Nana Akufo-Addo, whom he described as the “mother serpent of corruption” after resigning as the country’s first Special Prosecutor in 2020.

He cited a lack of support to investigate and prosecute corruption cases within the NPP administration as one of his reasons for stepping down.

ALSO READ:

Police intercept 88 persons allegedly recruited for election security in Western…

In a sharply worded epistle released just days before the 2024 general elections, Mr Amidu  alleged that Dr. Bawumia’s entry into Ghanaian politics was rooted in opportunism.

He claimed that the Bawumia family was historically aligned with the National Democratic Congress (NDC) before Dr. Bawumia switched allegiance to the NPP following an unsuccessful attempt to become the NDC’s running mate.

Martin Amidu expressed vehement opposition to Dr. Bawumia’s presidential bid, citing his association with President  Akufo-Addo, whom Amidu accused of widespread corruption and mismanagement.

He described Dr. Bawumia as a mere extension of Akufo-Addo, referring to him as the president’s “clone” and “poodle.”

“The grooming, cloning, and indoctrination of Dr. Bawumia into Nana Akufo-Addo’s image has been so complete that a Bawumia presidency would merely extend the corrupt governance principles established under Akufo-Addo,” he wrote.

He added that a Bawumia presidency would ensure the continued shielding of corrupt practices from scrutiny, protecting the interests of the president’s inner circle.

Mr Amidu warned that electing Dr. Bawumia would perpetuate the current administration’s hardships.

“A vote for Dr. Bawumia is a vote for the continuation of the ‘create, loot, and share’ ethos, which has brought nothing but suffering to Ghanaians,” he stated.

He urged voters to choose change and demand probity and accountability in leadership.

The former Attorney General further questioned Dr. Bawumia’s integrity and leadership capacity, criticizing his inability to embody the values of honesty, selflessness, and service.

“Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia is not a reflection of the high moral character upheld by his own family or the forebears of Northern Ghana. He is an opportunist who has abandoned these principles for political expediency,” he added.

Source: Myjoyonline

READ ALSO:

• 2024 polls: Mahama promises to revive Nyinahin bauxite industry
• Police intercept 88 persons allegedly recruited for election security in Western North
• Otumfuoyere Nana Abena Achiaa pleads support to build schools on her land

In an opinion piece, Mr Amidu argues that the president’s last-minute infrastructural commissions are a blatant abuse of incumbency and a calculated effort to obscure his administration’s economic and social failures.

“President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo is so scared of a free and fair democratic contest… that he reserved most of the infrastructural developments undertaken under his tenure to be commissioned by his chosen successor and himself within the last three months to the 7 December 2024 elections,” he wrote.

The former Special Prosecutor labelled this strategy “a condescending insult to the electorate” and a “smokescreen to syphon public funds at the taxpayers’ expense.”

Mr Amidu compared the current administration’s tactics to previous governments, noting how voters often reject incumbent candidates who employ such strategies.

“The electorate has historically exhibited an awareness of incumbent governments’ ploy to deliberately postpone the commissioning of projects… to cover up their mismanagement of the public purse, abuse of power, and corruption,” he observed.

Highlighting the parallels between this election season and those of 2000, 2008, and 2016, Martin Amidu dismissed the commissionings as election propaganda aimed at shielding the government’s misdeeds.

He stated, “The corrupt and looting government machinery of Nana Akufo-Addo and Dr Mahamudu Bawumia is so power-drunk that they only see the ordinary Ghanaian as a zombified idiot whose vote can be bought after dangling a few television pictures.”

Mr Amidu warned voters to recognize these tactics for what they are—a desperate bid to maintain power.

He called on Ghanaians to reflect on their hardships over the past seven years and reject the continuity of the “create, loot, and share” governance model.

ALSO READ:

• Patriotic vigilance needed to protect 2024 elections from politicised policing – Martin Amidu

• Election 2024: Martin Amidu calls for resistance to electoral manipulation

In an opinion piece, Amidu criticized the Police for its selective engagement with media editors without consulting the Ghana Journalists Association (GJA) or the Media Coalition, calling it a veiled attempt at political interference.

Mr. Amidu lauded the GJA for its skepticism regarding the Police Administration’s plan to station liaison officers at media houses during the elections.

He highlighted the GJA President, Albert Dwumfour’s concerns, quoting his remarks: “Is it a strategy to interfere with the work of the media? Is it a ploy to leak information from media houses? We can see some dark clouds surrounding this initiative by the Police, and answers to these questions will clear the sky.”

Mr. Amidu described Dwumfour’s remarks as a model of “rational optimism,” commending the GJA for prioritizing press freedom and resisting potential state surveillance.

The former Special Prosecutor expressed disappointment with the increasing politicization within the police, pointing to the 2023 Bugri Naabu leaked tape as evidence.

He alleged that appointments within the service have been manipulated for political gain, particularly to favor the ruling party’s election strategy.

Mr. Amidu stated, “The leaked recording achieved its objective of diverting attention from the underlying problem of the Police Service being compromised to serve a political agenda.”

He also accused Vice President Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, Chair of the Police Council, of using state resources and Ghana’s digitization efforts as tools for political advantage.

Mr. Amidu questioned how Dr. Bawumia obtained private details of citizens for campaign purposes, arguing, “The downside of digitalization is its potential as an Orwellian Big Brother intelligence-gathering and surveillance tool usable for selfish election interference.”

He called on citizens to remain vigilant, emphasizing the importance of protecting free and fair elections from manipulation. “The vigilance of a patriotic citizenry is the truest bulwark against long games and election rigging come 2024,” he concluded.

Drawing from his keynote address at the University for Development Studies in February, he declared, “The 1992 Constitution has been resilient for the past 30 years, and I am optimistic that citizens’ actions will defend it again.”

Mr. Amidu accused President Akufo-Addo of leveraging executive power to manipulate key public institutions, including the Electoral Commission (EC).

He criticized the appointment of EC officials without broad stakeholder consultation, stating, “The entire membership of the EC is one of the public institutions Nana Akufo-Addo… hand-picked with a placid Council of State to facilitate his election-winning long game.”

Mr. Amidu’s concerns extended to the EC’s decision to limit media accreditation at collation centers for the first time since 1992 and to deny accreditation to some civil society organizations (CSOs) as election observers.

“When did the cockroach ever win a case in a court of fowls?” he quipped, likening the situation to a rigged process.

Reflecting on the broader implications, Amidu noted, “The future stability of the 1992 Constitution is dependent on how free, fair, and transparent the 7 December 2024 elections are seen to have been managed.”

He warned that failure to uphold electoral integrity could deepen polarization and undermine public trust in democratic institutions.

Amidu reserved particular criticism for CSOs that, in his view, facilitated the erosion of constitutional safeguards by supporting questionable appointments and policies.

“The complicity of the EC in the disenfranchisement of the residents of the SALL appears to be one of the considerations for the alienation of Franklin Cudjoe from the diabolical intentions of the President,” he said, highlighting the need for vigilance.

Calling for collective resistance, Mr. Amidu stressed the importance of both domestic and international election observers, free media access, and proactive citizen engagement.

“Let all patriotic Ghanaians and believers in democracy the world over defend the integrity of the 2024 elections,” he urged.

ALSO READ:

• ‘Bawku conflict politicised for electoral gains’ – Martin Amidu alleges

• Lower political tensions to ensure fair elections – Martin Amidu to Ghana’s leaders

Describing the move as “insulting to the electorate,” Mr. Amidu deemed it unnecessary, particularly given its proximity to the December 7 elections.

In a memorandum dated November 22, 2024, the Majority Leader urged the Speaker of Parliament to convene Parliament on November 28 and 29, 2024, to address what Mr. Amidu termed “a needless tall list of non-urgent Government Business.”

The former Special Prosecutor did not mince words, asserting that the proposed recall appears to be an attempt to “rush through and railroad important items… down the throats of Ghanaians.”

He questioned the practicality of such a session, given that many Members of Parliament (MPs) are actively engaged in election campaigns critical to their political futures.

“One wonders what useful purpose would be served by disrupting these electioneering campaigns,” Mr. Amidu argued, noting that opponents not currently in Parliament would continue canvassing in the MPs’ absence.

Mr. Amidu also critiqued the memorandum for its apparent disingenuousness in appealing for unity.

Citing the Majority Leader’s call to “rise above partisan considerations,” he countered: “It is insulting to the electorate to hear this after the open and nauseating acrimony exhibited by the 8th Parliament.”

He lambasted the timing and intent of the recall, suggesting it prioritizes financial convenience for MPs over the national interest.

“Convening Parliament for two days only may be convenient for the finances of Members of Parliament; otherwise, I see no rational reason for wasting the public purse just days before the 2024 elections.”

Reflecting on broader governance issues, Mr. Amidu lamented the lack of attention to pressing national emergencies such as the October 2024 Bawku crisis.

“The purposive government mismanagement of the Bawku crisis, which has killed and maimed hundreds of citizens, is not even an agenda item for the Majority Leader,” he observed.

ALSO READ:

• Afenyo-Markin has shown great and competent leadership – Nana B

• Parliament: Supreme Court didn’t mandate seating arrangement – Afenyo-Markin told

According to the former Special Prosecutor, the government’s inadequate response to the crisis has worsened the situation, causing significant loss of life and displacement of residents.

“The government, by refusing or failing to be adequately represented by the Attorney General at the Court of Appeal… appears to have facilitated the current fratricidal cycle of killings,” Amidu alleged, referencing a court decision that sparked renewed conflict in Bawku.

He further pointed to logistical challenges affecting Bawku residents as evidence of deliberate voter suppression.

“The depopulation of the Bawku township during this election season means that a chunk of the electorate who were lucky to survive and escape are being denied their vote on 7 December 2024. The dead, of course, have lost their votes,” Amidu stated.

Amidu accused President Akufo-Addo of prioritizing political endorsements over national security, citing the President’s plea during a recent tour for Ghanaians to elect Dr. Bawumia as his successor.

He described the President’s actions as manipulative, calling Dr. Bawumia “the puppet master’s heir.”

The former Special Prosecutor questioned the integrity of the electoral process in conflict-prone regions, asking whether elections could be held safely in Bawku and its surrounding areas.

“The larger issue is the uncertainty whether the whole Bawku Traditional Council area would even be able to exercise their franchise on 7 December 2024 in a free, fair, and transparent manner,” he said.

Amidu’s remarks highlight growing concerns about the security implications of Ghana’s 2024 elections.

He called on Dr. Bawumia to take responsibility and address these concerns directly, warning against a campaign that trivializes the loss of life.

“What is the use of digitization and drones when human security is ignored? This is not leadership.”

ALSO READ:

• Bawku Conflict: One more person killed, death toll now 26

• Bawku: Our people feel abandoned, betrayed by the State – Kusaug Peoples Congress

The former Special Prosecutor questioned the frequent endorsement of Dr. Bawumia by President Akufo-Addo, urging the Vice President to “move beyond mere rhetoric” and prove his capability to lead Ghana.

“The claim by the President that Dr. Bawumia is the most competent person to manage the safety and security of Ghanaians after the government’s current tenure needs to go beyond mere rhetoric and be supported by concrete evidence,” Mr. Amidu stated.

Highlighting the persistent conflicts in Bawku under Dr. Bawumia’s watch as acting President, Amidu lamented the human cost of violence in the region.

“Bawku has been burning since October 2024, with an extension to the North East and Northern Regions under Dr. Bawumia’s watch,” he noted.

He further cited specific incidents, including the deaths of 23 people in Bawku and eight others in the North East Region during violent clashes.

Mr. Amidu criticised the government’s response, stating that it often took President Akufo-Addo’s return to Ghana to convene a National Security Council meeting or impose curfews.

“Dr. Bawumia watched the mayhem in silence whilst busying himself campaigning to be elected the next President of Ghana,” Mr. Amidu remarked, describing this as a failure to uphold the Vice President’s constitutional duty.

Martin Amidu’s critique extended to the broader political strategy of the NPP, alleging a deliberate neglect of security in northern Ghana for electoral advantage.

He questioned whether the government was complicit in the resurgence of violence in Bawku, accusing it of facilitating a “government-generated resurgent fratricide” for political purposes.

Urging accountability, Amidu called on Dr. Bawumia to address Ghanaians directly on his security policies and achievements.

“Bawumia needs to move away from the Kamala Harris rhetorical style of campaigning and speak directly to the public,” he said.

“The ancestors are watching!”

ALSO READ:

• A vote for Bawumia is an endorsement of thievery, hardship, and corruption – John…

• ‘Intelligent’ Bawumia has solutions to Ghana’s problems – Samira asserts

President-elect, Donald Trump’s landslide victory is a second warning to the world political elite, deep state, and bureaucratic establishment that whilst they may succeed in deceiving the sovereign electorate some of the time, they will not succeed all the time in beguiling them to vote against their interest as citizens.

I also wish to congratulate the People of the USA for a second time for asserting their silent power of sovereignty in voting for the non-establishment candidate, President-elect Donald Trump, to demonstrate their revulsion against democratic corruption, cronyism, patronage, and disguised political extortion by the political establishment and their gluttonous allies.

I am a social democrat and not a conservative by worldview but the blatant use of the deep state, other security apparatus, attempted assassinations, and the appearance of legality to prevent former President Trump from contesting in the election alerted the ordinary working American, and other working people of the world, including myself, to how the political elite and the deep state hide behind the empty rhetorics of democracy and the rule of law to obtain the votes of the electorate to feed their greed for naked power and rent-seeking.

President Trump’s decisive victory demonstrates the catastrophic failure of despicable and unscrupulous incumbent government disinformation and McCarthyism propaganda championed by the mainstream media in the USA that is a harbinger of similar failures and defeats to come in world politics.

I believe that President Trump will use his second and last tenure as the 47 President of the USA to leave a legacy of fighting for his country with every breath in his body and to deliver in his own words: “… the strong, safe, and prosperous America that our children deserve and that you deserve…. the golden age of America….” I also believe that President Trump will want to leave the legacy of being the President who pulled the world from the brink of a third world war and nuclear war catastrophe.

Congratulations President-elect, donald trump and may your victory be the golden age of the whole world

Martin A. B. K. Amidu
November 7, 2024

In a recent article, he described the GBA’s support as “dangerous for our Constitution, democracy, and the rule of law.”

He cautioned that unqualified loyalty to the Chief Justice’s administrative decisions risks undermining the independence of the judicial system.

“The unbridled support of anything and everything the Chief Justice says or does… borders on sycophancy,” Mr. Amidu warned.

He further stated that citizens should expect judicial decisions that are both independent and transparent.

Mr. Amidu’s critique extended to the relationship between the judiciary and national security, questioning whether the Chief Justice had acted on independent judgment or based on “instructions… from the National Security Council.”

He emphasized the need for greater transparency in decisions affecting public access to justice, especially in the wake of electoral season tensions.

The former Attorney General openly criticized the Chief Justice’s administrative decision to close courts in Bawku and surrounding areas.

He described the decision to close courts, including the regional capital Bolgatanga, as “unprecedented” and detrimental to citizens’ rights.

The Chief Justice, according to a memorandum issued by the Judicial Secretary, justified the closures as a safety measure due to escalating security concerns.

However, Mr. Amidu deemed the closure rationale “naïve,” pointing out that Bolgatanga has historically remained unaffected by Bawku’s sporadic violence.

He stated that “throughout the Bawku conflict… the regional capital has never been… in the conflict area.”

The former AG emphasized the potential legal ramifications of suspending court functions just weeks before the national elections, arguing that it infringes upon citizens’ access to justice and could disrupt the judicial review of election-related issues.

“We the People demand Parliamentary oversight of the administrative decision… to close the High Court in Bolgatanga and its environs,” he stated.

Mr. Amidu also expressed concern that the closure decision lacked sufficient input from local legal stakeholders, questioning the Chief Justice’s consultations.

He described the decision to close courts, including in the regional capital Bolgatanga, as “unprecedented” and detrimental to citizens’ rights.

The Chief Justice, according to a memorandum issued by the Judicial Secretary, justified the closures as a safety measure due to escalating security concerns.

However, Mr. Amidu deemed the closure rationale “naïve,” pointing out that Bolgatanga has historically remained unaffected by Bawku’s sporadic violence.

He stated, “throughout the Bawku conflict… the regional capital has never been… in the conflict area.”

The former AG emphasized the potential legal ramifications of suspending court functions just weeks before the national elections, arguing it infringes upon citizens’ access to justice and could disrupt the judicial review of election-related issues.

“We the People demand Parliamentary oversight of the administrative decision… to close the High Court in Bolgatanga and its environs,” he stated.

Mr. Amidu also expressed concern that the closure decision lacked sufficient input from local legal stakeholders, questioning the Chief Justice’s consultations.

He said, “The Upper East Regional Bar Association… has not met to pass a resolution requesting the closure.”

ALSO READ:

7 dead, others injured in head-on collision on Berekum-Sunyani road

Watch CCTV footage of dramatic Adabraka daylight robbery

Adabraka robbery getaway vehicle tracked to Ashaiman

The latest intractable conflict giving rise to a figurative burning down of Parliament on Tuesday, 22 October 2024 over a purposeful and needless self-created disagreement for political aggrandisement and power junketeering on whether members of parliament who intend to contest the 2024 elections taking place on 7 December 2024 as independent candidates can do so was declared from Tamale in the Northern Region on 13 October 2024 during an NDC ceremony.

It was consummated in Parliament on Tuesday, 15 October 2024 under the leadership of the Minority Leader and not the announcer of the action from Tamale, opposed by the majority leadership, and culminated as usual in the hands of the Speaker of Parliament for a transactional decision on Thursday, 17 October 2024.

Any objective citizen familiar with the modus operandi of the Speaker of Parliament in his usual vacillatory transactional decision-making since the rejection of the Government’s 2022 Budget Statement and Economic Policy, the eventual approval of the same budget, the passage of the estimates and the E-levy by Parliament presided over by the same Speaker would have predicted how the transactional chips were going to fall.

The Speaker, as was to be expected, declared the seats of four members of parliament vacant in accordance with the Speaker’s agreement with the invitation to him by the Minority Leader “…. to declare the seats of these four Members vacant in accordance with Article 97(1)(g) and 97(1)(h) of the Constitution 1992.”

The consequence as the Speaker well knew by the invitation of the Minority Leader was that: “…. if these seats are declared vacant, the resultant effect on the composition of this House would be that the NDC would have 136 seats, while the NPP would have 135 seats, thus making the NDC the Majority Party in Parliament.”

In the interim, as a countering conflict interaction move, the Majority Leader had filed an action in the Supreme Court to restrain the actions of the Speaker and the Minority in Parliament.

But the expected decision of the Speaker put the Minority side which had by then declared itself as the Majority in Parliament into overdrive immediately like the donkey which announced its intentions to the gods or God before a decision could be made whether to give it horns or not.

On Friday, 18 October 2024 various authoritative statements made by leading members of the NDC gave notice that the E-levy which the very NDC Speaker presided over and passed, and other taxes in which both sides participated in passing were to be repealed by private members bills. A clear example of the zombification of the electorate.

By the evening of Friday, 18 October 2024 the Supreme Court as the final arbiter of constitutional disputes under the 1992 Constitution had issued ex parte orders staying the declarations by the Speaker of Parliament on suspending the four members of parliament from participation in the business of Parliament until the final determination of the case filed by the Majority Leader.

The weekend has been awash with criticism and condemnations of the orders of the Supreme Court by beneficiaries of the conflict interaction begun by the NDC on 13 October 2024 with a press conference on Sunday, 20 October 2024 literally challenging the authority of the Supreme Court to have made the decision and orders on 18 October 2024, and touting the Speaker’s credentials of 32 years in Parliament, his courage and resoluteness, urging him to protect the dignity and sanctity of Parliament, and vowing to resist oppressor’s rule.

In an unconstitutional, undemocratic and an insult to the rule of law the Minority Leader declared in a press statement on Sunday, 20 October 2024 that: “27. The NDC MPs now constitute the Majority Caucus, in line with the Standing Orders of Parliament… 29.

We will jealously protect our new Majority status and will not bow, retreat nor surrender our lawfully earned status…” In one fell swoop the Minority in Parliament nullified the decision of the Supreme Court.

The Minority Leader’s press conference is in contempt of the decision and orders of the Supreme Court. Whether the Speaker will obey or disobey the decision and orders of the Court on Tuesday, 22 October 2024 will soon unfold tomorrow when Parliament convenes.

“6. …. It is therefore incumbent upon me, as Speaker of this House, to address these issues thoroughly. In doing this, I am simply applying the provisions of the Constitution, 1992, Parliament Act, 1965, Act 300, the Standing Orders of Parliament, 2024 precedents, and established legal principles.

The issue of interpretation and enforcement of the Constitution lies in the bosom of the Supreme Court and not that of the Speaker.”

The Speaker himself recognized that: “The issue of interpretation and enforcement of the Constitution lies in the bosom of the Supreme Court and not that of the Speaker.”

Nonetheless the Speaker with his eyes open in making his declaration indulged in issues of interpretation and enforcement of the Constitution in his analysis of Articles 97(1) (g) and(h) of the 1992 Constitution in several respects. For example, the Speaker stated in paragraph 12 of his declaration that:

“12. The provisions of Article 97(1)(g) and (h) are designed to safeguard the principles of party loyalty, voter representation, and political stability. Deflection is prohibited because it undermines the trust placed in MPs by their constituents and can lead to instability in Parliament.

These constitutional safeguards ensure that Members of Parliament remain accountable to both their parties and the electorate, and they prevent MPs from engaging in behaviour that could amount to fraud or disruption of the functioning of Parliament.”

The foregoing was a clear usurpation of the interpretative and enforcement jurisdiction of the Supreme Court apportioned to the judiciary under Articles 2 and 130 of the 1992

Constitution. One cannot approbate and reprobate, the saying goes. How does any reasonable person condemn the Supreme Court when the Speaker has blatantly offered it the opportunity to assert its constitutional authority to determine whether or not what the Speaker did on 17 October 2024 constituted an unlawful usurpation of judicial power under Article 125 (3)?

Both the NPP and the NDC are using every opportunity to whip up the gullible public’s support to hoodwink the electorate to vote for it at the 2024 elections regardless of the integrity and truthfulness of the information presented to the electorate.

Over the years, particularly from 2001 to date, both political parties have sought to bring the Supreme Court to the bar of politics. It is, therefore, needless to complain when one’s ass is gored that the Supreme Court is indulging in political decision-making when those who invited the Court to do so are the very two adversarial political parties.

What is the difference between recruiting the Speaker of Parliament who owes his allegiance to the NDC to make a favourable decision to give the NDC a majority status in Parliament and a Supreme Court which has been properly vetted and approved in a bi-partisan manner under the Constitution assuming its authority to determine the usurpation of its judicial power by the Speaker of Parliament?

Sore losers on both sides jostling for power for its own sake without any intention to uphold and defend the 1992 Constitution as by law established.

I did not intend to get involved in the on-going do and die escalatory zero sum conflict between the NPP and the NDC which does not consider the events leading to the 4 June 1979 uprising and the 31 December 1981 Revolution in the 2024 election circle.

I am writing this piece because I received a telephone call on 20 October 2024 from the principal of a nephew of mine who started engaging me since Sunday 13 October 2024 as an emissary of his principal on the announcement made in Tamale, in the Northern Region on Sunday, 13 October 2024 evincing an intention to raise the issue of members of parliament who intend to contest the 2024 elections as independent candidates.

I explained to my nephew that I did not think the proposition will fly when it went to the Supreme Court.

My nephew continued to update me on developments in this matter until 19 October 2024 when he told me his principal had asked for my telephone number to reach out to me. Then came the call of 20 October 2024 throwing my nephew under the bus in a Machiavellian manner by denying part of the brief to my nephew to contact me.

It was a barefaced untruth. I refuse to allow any attempt to belittle my intellect after more than three scores and ten years of my earthly existence by little minds with no respect for elders.

The 2024 elections in Ghana must be fought and won on the integrity, honesty and policy programmes of the various candidates and their political parties.

The unnecessary hyping of national tensions and promotion of violence which has the propensity to implode the 1992 Constitution just for the sake of raw power for its own sake without the interests of the citizens at heart must stop.

Beware of 4 June 1979! Beware of 31 December 1981! None of the two major political parties will win when they undermine and facilitate the implosion of the 1992 Constitution. The protection of the Constitution mandates that all citizens skew the greed for raw power for its own sake and put Ghana First.

Martin A. B. K. Amidu
21 October 2024

Mr Amidu says he is not ready to apologise for the remarks made in his article.

This is despite a demand by Alban Bagbin for him to do so within seven days.

He said he would only apologise to his readers “for the accidental slip in typing the words “Dubai in 2021” instead of “Dubai in 2022″ in the question in paragraph 18 of my article dated 26 May 2024 and published on 27 May 2024, which I hereby apologise to them for.”

On May 28, the Speaker of Parliament denied allegations by former Special Prosecutor that he had a meeting with President Akufo-Addo in Dubai in 2021, prior to the rejection of the 2022 budget.

According to a statement released by the Speaker’s Communication Unit, the claims are baseless, unfounded, and part of a deliberate attempt to tarnish the Speaker’s reputation.

The statement signed by Peter Bamfo, said Mr Bagbin has a long record of distinguished and honest public service and will continue to put the interest of Ghana first.

“The Rt Hon Speaker will not be deterred from carrying out his public service duties, guiding and providing leadership for Parliament even in the face of insinuations, unprovoked attacks and unfounded allegations like Mr Amidu’s,”the statement added.

The clarification followed an allegation made by Mr Amidu in a write-up calling out the National Democratic Congress (NDC), its 2024 flagbearer and national chairman.

The Speaker called on Mr Amidu to retract what he described as false and malicious statements within 7 days or risk further action.

But Martin Amidu appears unfazed. In a fresh article dated May 29, the former Special Prosecutor said “I have done nothing for which I need to withdraw, retract, and apologise for within seven days to Mr Bagbin who is dissipating the public purse needlessly in Dubai for health challenges which are treatable or manageable in Ghana.”

He added that “if you [Alban Bagbin] think my article defames you in anyway, defend your integrity and honour by issuing a writ of summons and a statement of claim against me in a court of law so that I can prove to the whole world that the things I wrote against the NDC in which you were mentioned as its self-confessed corrupt Speaker are either true, justifiable, and constitute fair comments or questions on public matters on the conduct of a public officer, the Speaker, in the public interest.”

READ ALSO:

• Bagbin demands apology from Martin Amidu

I have learnt to live with the McCarthyism of Kissi Agyebeng and his executioners at Joy FM.

What has really baffled me, and which is what I have been trying to understand is the reason for which John Dramani Mahama who is the leader and flagbearer of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) has unleashed his NDC attack dogs such as Alhassan Suhuyini, Sammy Gyamfi, and to crown it all the Chairman of the NDC, Johnson Aseidu Nketiah, on me since 17 May 2024 based on hearsay evidence of a petition I am alleged to have submitted to the President on 30 April 2024 for the removal of the Special Prosecutor.

I cannot understand why the NDC will collaborate with Kissi Agyebeng’s preferred rented media house and his chief executioner, […], to make allegations against me without publishing the alleged petition on which the allegations are based to provide me
the opportunity to confirm or deny my signature and rebut or admit the accusations.

My trial, and the trauma it has caused me is allegedly based on a document written by the Chief Justice.

I have every reason to question the authenticity of the document attributed to the Chief Justice because I established with mathematical precision with the assistance of information and communication technologies (ICT) that a Joint Statement published at the instance of Kissi Agyebeng as a Joint Statement by the OSP and the Judicial Service of Ghana (JSG) was a forgery by the OSP when it displayed the OSP logo along side the Coat of Arms of Ghana as representing the JSG.

The Right to Information Commission (RTIC) has my evidence, has not concluded its mediation, and knows why I am not making my proof
public.

In addition and firstly, I am not familiar with the signature of the Chief Justice.

Secondly, the document attributed to the Chief Justice has no reference number as required by public records administration to avoid forgery of official documents.

Thirdly, as a former student of the Tamale Commercial Institute, the first commercial institute in Northern Ghana, I cannot fathom a Chief Justice writing and signing a document in which she will refer to herself as “the Honourable Chief Justice”.

Fourthly, I do not think that the Chief Justice would have written and signed the document attributed to her and have it published in the media or leaked to the media.

Fifth, the alleged document was addressed to only Kissi Agyebeng, the Special Prosecutor, whose media house, Joy FM, broke the supposed news at 6:00 am on 17 May 2024 when the Chief Justice’s document was dated the previous day, 16 May 2024.

Sixth, I cannot fathom that the Chief Justice if she is the author of the document attributed to her gave the addressee a fiat to source the document to Joy FM.

Seventh, Joy FM and the NDC have refused or failed to publish the letter from the Presidency to the Chief Justice or the alleged petition for purposes of authentication to enable a reasoned response from me as the Joy FM’s accused in its trial in the court of public opinion.

Finally, it is impossible for me to have written a petition under my signature and referred to Kissi Agyebeng as “Honourable Kissi Agyebeng” as alleged in the document attributed to the Chief Justice.

I expect the Chief Justice, if she really wrote the document making the rounds and did not publish or authorize its publication in the media, to react to the authenticity of the letter or the memorandum and its contents to put the public mind at rest or take such steps as will restore the integrity of the Judicial Service as not being part of my trauma resulting form my trial by Kissi Agyebeng, Joy FM, and the NDC in the court of public opinion.

What my trial by Kissi Agyebeng and his chief executioners at Joy FM have done by their attempt to try me in the court of public opinion has rather fortified my determination to defend the 1992 Constitution to ensure that no citizen is presumed guilty in the court of public opinion without the accompanying evidence being made available to the public to make an informed judgment.

Kissi Agyebeng, Joy FM, and the NDC’s McCarthyism must be stopped by all patriotic citizens before they implode the 1992 Constitution.

John Dramani Mahama as the leader of the NDC sent the Chairman of the NDC to Joy FM on 23 May 2024 to speak against my integrity by stating that: “The Martin Amidu I know, until this thing was done, I trusted that he was a very principled person. My faith in his being
principled is badly shaken.”

After dehumanizing and dishonouring my person, the NDC Chairman did not stop at that.

The Chairman of the NDC speaking on behalf of the leadership of the NDC stated further without any supporting evidence that: “He shouldn’t have done that at all. I am still trying to understand why. Comrade Martin, have you abandoned your view that Nana Akufo-Addo is the mother serpent of corruption?

Or you still hold that view? If you still hold that view, when you came to a roadblock that I want to do this thing against finance minister and the president said no way, you resigned and came to open up.

If your successor has come to a similar roadblock and the president is demanding his resignation, won’t you show solidarity? But you are rather making yourself the tool for the president to be able to achieve his objective of fighting those who are fighting corruption.”

John Dramani Mahama, your hatchet man Alhassan Suhuyini called me unprintable names on 17 May 2024 and so did your Sammy Gyamfi on 20 May 2024. There were other NDC appointment seekers even before the 7 December 2024 elections who were assigned by the
NDC to discredit me without producing any evidence, but for you to permit the Chairman of the NDC to come after me while you hide in the shadows is unacceptable to me. I do not owe my integrity to anybody in today’s NDC because it is not the NDC we founded in 1992 to
transition the PNDC into constitutional rule when I was the Chairman of the House Committee of the Consultative Assembly and, therefore, the liaison between the PNDC and the Assembly.

The Chairman of the NDC, a person presumed to be of high moral character and proven integrity permitted himself to be appointed by a self-confessed … NDC Speaker of Parliament onto the Board of the Parliamentary Service despite a glaring and impermissible conflict of interest under Article 284 of the 1992 Constitution. Only idiots will cherish the moral values of such a Chairman of the NDC.

In any case, Asiedu Nketiah and John Mahama have you ever heard that as a politically exposed person, I set up a stevedoring company and was assisted by GPHA to milk Ghanaians during the regime of any of the Governments under which I served? Did I publicize the facts about Asiedu Nketiah’s stevedoring business at Tema as the Special Prosecutor before I sent Joshua Hamidu Akamba to warn him about
attacking my integrity? Asiedu Nketiah, I wish to refresh your memory that the abbreviated name of the stevedoring company which was also involved in oil and gas etc is – KMSC- and to remind you that the partners you used your public position to cheat out of the company for your son you brought from Canada to manage KMSC are still aggrieved and alive.

I left loads of facts and evidence on pending investigations, including documentary evidence at the OSP in some of which Kissi Agyebeng was the lawyer for the suspects.

Kissi Agyebeng because he has converted the OSP into an instrument for political vindictiveness instead of a law enforcement agency has refused or failed to make available to Joy FM the facts and evidence on the National Lottery Authority/TekStart Africa Limited investigation in which he was the lawyer for one of the suspects.

Kissi Agyebeng has also suppressed from trial in the court of public opinion the bribery and corruption investigation involving Kissi
Agyebeng’s partner at Cromwell Gray LLP and client, Anas Aremeyaw Anas, in the Charles Bissue case in which Kissi Agyebeng wrote to the OSP during my tenure as the lawyer for Anas Aremeyaw Anas, to mention but a few suppressed investigations.

The Charles Bissue investigation docket is with Kissi Agyebeng who has refused to cause Joy FM to publish for trial in the court of public opinion the reasons John Mahama used to order the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to issue a Government of Ghana Service Passport to Anas
Aremeyaw Anas and one other under the pretext of attending a mere short conference in Cambridge University in the UK.

The Charles Bissue docket at the OSP also contains the impersonation and corruption employed by Kissi Agyebeng’s partner and client, Anas Aremayaw Anas, to register ORR Resources Enterprise for the entrapment of citizens which Kissi Agyebeng has refused to make available to Joy FM for publication and the trial of his partner, Anas Aremeyaw Anas, in the court of public opinion.

Does the fact that a court of law heard the charges against Samuel Adam Mahama Foster and his UK friends in the Airbus SE-Ghana case and issued an arrest warrant for them resulting in the INTERPOL Red Notice not signify beyond doubt that Government Official 1 is his elder brother, John Dramani Mahama, who was the Vice-President and later the President of Ghana at the time of the bribery loot of almost €5million from the public purse?

I led the Airbus SE investigation and showed the head of investigation at the OSP at the time, then Inspector Mark Karikari and his team, the hotels and leased apartment Samuel Adam Mahama Foster and his UK friends resided in, including the government property sold to Michael Abu Sakara Foster where Samuel Adam Foster claimed as his abode on the forms he filled at the Ghana Immigration Service at the Kotoka International Airport upon his first entry into Ghana with his UK friends.

Apart from acquiring all the immigration records of entry and departure from Ghana of Samuel Adam Mahama Foster and his UK friends as part of the Airbus SE-Ghana corruption investigation, I managed to secure bank accounts and statements of Samuel Adam Foster as
supporting evidence. I also showed the investigation team the office of Abu Sakara Foster at the T junction at the Adabraka/Kokomlemle junction on the Kojo Thompson Road in case he was required for interrogation.

This is how thorough the Airbus SE investigation was conducted by the OSP under my watch before I postponed the investigation to after the 2020 elections to avoid accusations of election interference.

I never published the foregoing salacious facts which would have affected the 2020 elections including the names of the hotels and apartments Samuel Adam Foster and his UK friends stayed while in Accra for the corruption transactions facilitated by his elder brother, John Mahama, because it was not ethical to do so before interrogating him and charging him with an offence before a court of law.

I even refused to invite John Mahama for interrogation before the 2020 elections in order not to be seen using the OSP as a tool of political electioneering campaign on behalf of the NPP Government. The insults I received from the NPP Government and its supporters are published online for those who care to read. Kissi Agyebeng has the OSP dockets so why has he not caused the NDC’s executioners at Joy FM to publish same and try John Mahama in the court of public opinion just as he has been doing to selected and targeted victims since his assumption of office as the Special Prosecutor?

Asiedu Nketiah and John Mahama, if you claim to be incorruptible, kindly make a promise to Ghanaians that should you win the 2024 elections you will invite the Scotland Yard to conduct an investigation into the Airbus SE-Ghana scandal in which the American, the British, French, and Spanish Governments already identified Government Official 1 as Samuel Adam Mahama Foster’s elder brother who served as Vice-President and President of Ghana.

Asiedu Nketia and John Mahama will you kindly inform Ghanaians of the owners of the Tamale Catering Rest House which was divested to a former NDC National Executive and Minister of State who has left the property in disrepair as an eye sore in the city of Tamale? What is the marital relationship of one of the owners who bought the Tamale Catering Rest House to John Mahama? Come clean with the true facts and evidence before Ghanaians, you men of integrity and high moral character determined to fight corruption in 2025.

Nana Asante Bediatuo wrote a needless letter in November 2020 after I resigned as the Special Prosecutor leading me to explain why I perceived the then President to be a mother serpent of corruption in the Agyapa Transactions. I stand by every word I wrote in riposte to  the defamatory words used against me in that needless letter from the Presidency.

Despite my views on mother serpent of corruption, the Ghanaian electorate voted for the mother serpent at the 2020 Presidential election in preference to the Airbus SE-Ghana’s Government Official 1 as to who was more corrupt.

Asiedu Nketiah and John Mahama, do you want Ghanaians to believe that despite the verdict of the electorate at the 2020 Presidential election you expected any constitutional activist who has dedicated his life to defending the 1992 Constitution to violate the same constitution by refusing to recognize the person who took the constitutional oath on 7 January 2021 as the President of Ghana?

You must be anarchists parading as believers in the 1992 Constitution, democracy, and the rule of law.

Asiedu Nketiah and John Mahama, did your self-confessed corrupt Speaker of Parliament not meet the President in Dubai in 2021 before he returned to Parliament to turn a closed eye to his own determination that rejected the 2022 Budget Statement ad Economic Policy of Government?

Did you not see, observe, and read the reaction and excitement amongst your Minority Leader and his team after meeting the President on 20 May 2024. Does it lie in your mouth to insinuate that as a constitutional activist I should not recognize Nana Akufo-Addo who beat your John Mahama at the 2020 elections as the President of Ghana? I defend the 1992 Constitution and I cannot dispute the will of the people at Presidential elections conducted under it, notwithstanding my personal views.

The NDC cannot wish that because the NDC created and empowered Anas Aremayaw Anas as a covert Government agent after the 2008 elections when his law partner at Cromwell Gray LLP is appointed the Special Prosecutor in 2021 by the NDC’s adversary, the constitution and laws of Ghana should be suspended until the NDC assumes office in 2025 to take advantage of the relationship between Anas Aremeyaw Anas and his partner to boast that Kissi Agyebeng their political hatchet man and executioner was an  appointee of the
NPP.

I am the person who started writing about Nana Akufo-Addo’s long game to break the 8 which inured to the benefit of the NDC when nobody dared to study and analyse the open source security and intelligence materials on the issue at the time.

John Mahama also knows that when his emissaries assured me that he had repented the past, I wrote articles criticizing the Government and Kissi Agyebeng for highlighting the Airbus SE-Ghana investigations without any reference to the Agyapa Transaction Report.

The NDC and Joy FM never accused me of colluding with the NPP at the time. Joy FM and NDC are so cowardly not to publish the alleged petition I am alleged to have submitted to the President on 30 April 2024, but rather resort to insinuations to try me in the court of public opinion.

The NDC has thrown the first stone and I am ready, able, and willing to make more detailed scandalous revelations supported by facts, figures, and evidence about the integrity of the NDC if that is what John Dramani Mahama and Asiedu Nketiah want.

I dare Kissi Agyebeng, Joy FM, and the NDC to make available to the public whatever petition they claim they have in their possession for which they are trying and traumatizing me in the court of public opinion to enable me to authenticate whether the signature on the
petition is mine and then react to their accusations. Let the heavens fall, I will continue to defend the 1992 Constitution against all greedy bastards abusing the rights of citizens under the guise of law enforcement.

I will also continue to fight against corruption and the trial of citizens in the court of public opinion for the profit of media houses and their collaborating entrepreneurial nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) parading as anti-corruption crusaders even when I am in a minority of one Ghanaian.

Martin A. B. K. Amidu
26 May 2024
POSTCRIPTUM

By Section 7 of Act 959 – “A person who is appointed, seconded, or otherwise engaged by the Office shall be subjected to vetting.” Consequently, I caused the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) (now the National Intelligence Bureau (NIB)) to vet the staff of the OSP
during my tenure.

Kissi Agyebeng claims to have engaged employees without complying with Section 7 of Act 959 or Regulation 35 of L.I. 2374 on the Oath of Office and Official Secrecy to be sworn before the named designated officer set out in the Second Schedule before they assume office or perform a function of the OSP.

Kissi Agyebeng instead chose without any authority under Act 959 to invited foreigners from a United Stated secret security agency led by an African-American lady to compulsory conduct polygraph test on citizens of Ghana allegedly engaged by him using two or three stations of polygraph equipment for two weeks at the OSP.

The Minister for National Security ought to inform Ghanaians whether the secret polygraph tests compulsorily conducted on those citizens of Ghana purportedly employed by Kissi Agyebeng is consistent with the national security and intelligence laws of Ghana. Is the
Ministry of National Security, with its National Security Co-ordinator and the NIB, without the capability for conducting polygraph test on citizens of Ghana to warrant an invitation to a foreign security agency to gather information on citizens of Ghana through unapproved
polygraph test? The polygraph testing is to be unlawfully continued at a later date at the OSP.

Ghanaians be warmed of who you have as your Special Prosecutor! [26 May 2024].

According to him, he trusted Mr Amidu was a very principled man until his recent petition to the President Akufo-Addo seeking to remove Kissi Agyebeng as Special Prosecutor.

Speaking on JoyNews’ AM Show on May 23, he said, “The Martin Amidu I know, until this thing was done, I trusted that he was a very principled person. My faith in his being principled is badly shaken.”

This comment comes after a petition, dated April 30, 2024, was sent to the president by the former Special Prosecutor Martin Amidu, which was forwarded to Justice, Gertrude Torkonoo on May 6, 2024.

Mr Amidu alleged procurement breaches in the purchase of vehicles for the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and abuses involving judges and the administration of justice.

Other allegations included violations of citizens’ rights through arrests and detentions, violations of the right to information, and improper appointments of personnel to the office.

According to the National Chairman of the NDC, the motive of Mr Amidu’s petition remain unclear to him.

He is surprised that the very person the former Special Prosecutor once described as the “Mother serpent of corruption”, is the same person he would petition to deal with perceived corrupt acts.

The NDC Chairman stated that Mr Amidu’s decision to petition the President has weakened his credibility and undermined his previous efforts to fight corruption.

“He shouldn’t have done that at all. I am still trying to understand why. Comrade Martin, have you abandoned your view that Nana Akufo-Addo is the mother serpent of corruption? Or you still hold that view? If you still hold that view, when you came to a roadblock that I want to do this thing against finance minister and the president said no way, you resigned and came to open up.

“If your successor has come to a similar road block and the president is demanding his resignation, won’t you show solidarity? But you are rather making yourself the tool for the president to be able to achieve his objective of fighting those who are fighting corruption.”

Mr Asiedu Nketia stated that he cannot support either Amidu or the Special Prosecutor until ongoing investigations are completed and more information is made available.

ALSO READ:

• Genuine anti-corruption crusaders don’t hide behind masks – Martin Amidu to Anas

• I await to see how independently corruption cases will be handled by new ‘surrogate’…

According to him, prior to Mr Amidu’s petition, there were already plots to remove the Special Prosecutor from office.

Speaking on JoyNews’ The Pulse on May 20, he said Mr Amidu’s petition would only make Mr Agyebeng’s removal legitimate.

Although Sammy Gyamfi said he has not seen Martin Amidu’s full petition and has not heard a rebuttal from Kissi Agyebeng, he asserts that “Martin Amidu’s petition is only feeding into a grand conspiracy by the President to remove Kissi Agyebeng. You should be very naive not to see that.”

“The President has an agenda, to get out of office anybody who dares to fight corruption under him.”

He added that, there have been instances where individuals, including Daniel Yao Domelevo, were removed from office because they attempted to fight corruption.

Mr Gyamfi argued that, given there is already a plan to remove the Special Prosecutor and the fact that the president has forwarded it to the Chief Justice, Mr Agyebeng would undoubtedly be removed.

“It should be oblivious even to the naïve that there is a  conspiracy to remove the special prosecutor because clearly they are not happy with the fact that he is not doing their bidding in witch hunting certain people he would him to witch-hunt. They are not comfortable in some of the case, he has taken up,” he added.

ALSO READ:

• Asantehene @25: The Professor who carried the revered Golden Stool
• Man beats Police Chief Inspector to evade arrest [Video]
• CCTV captures moment car ran over 5 people, killing Policewoman at Abrepo junction

Speaking on Joy FM’s Newsfile on Saturday, Dr Osae-Kwapong scrutinised the basis of Mr Amidu’s petition from a governance perspective, questioning whether the allegations constitute impeachable offences.

Although Dr Osae-Kwapong acknowledged the former Special Prosecutor’s right to highlight concerns about his successor’s conduct, he stressed that it must be constructive in order not to erode the trust of the populace in institutions fighting corruption

“Mr Martin Amidu has every right to point to certain things and use them as a basis as to why he doesn’t think the special prosecutor has to remain in office. But as I look at some of the basis, I keep asking myself, do these rise to the level of an impeachable offense for which he must be removed from office?”

He further noted that, apart from the alleged procurement breaches, the other issues raised by Mr Amidu do not seem to reach the threshold necessary for impeachment.

“Except for maybe the procurement breaches if proven, these other issues, I am not sure, from a governance perspective rises to the level for which you must remove the special prosecutor from Office,” he said.

Citing an example, he noted, “the issue of the abuse of citizens’ rights, for all of the cases that I have followed, I don’t recall the Special Prosecutor not granting any of these accused persons due process. The fight against corruption can’t be fought gently. So maybe his approach may have been aggressive, or whatever you may want to describe it, but still, it was geared towards ensuring that, these cases, were prosecuted to an extent as possible and decide as to whether corruption or other corruption-related offenses have been committed.”

Touching on the procurement breaches raised in the petition, Dr Osae-Kwapong also highlighted that there are alternative remedies for addressing procurement infractions.

He questioned the necessity of jumping directly to impeachment, suggesting instead that administrative measures could be employed.

“But as I read through the petition, for me, to remove the special prosecutor from office, and not downplay some of these issues, I think that it has to be egregious enough, that you know, everybody should be able to look at it and say, okay, as for this one, he went too far or he went overboard so he is not fit for office, this is just scandalous, etc.

“But if other administrative remedies can be used to resolve some of these things, then you don’t want it to rise to this level of let’s remove him from office. For me it’s my opinion that if there are other remedies Why not resort to them? Why go first to remove him from office? The law we are talking about has been operational for only a few years, the first special prosecutor has left and we have the second one now, who knows what the outcome is going to be?” he quizzed.

He noted the move by Mr Amidu could negatively impact on the public’s confidence in the fight against corruption. Referring to a recent Afrobarometer findings by the CDD-Ghana, he noted the waning public perception of institutional integrity and confidence in anti-corruption efforts.

“It doesn’t also set a good precedent for the fight against corruption, and it deepens the already eroding public confidence in the fight against corruption. The confidence in the fight against corruption is on a sharp decline.

“We must hold public officials accountable but it just seems to reinforce this public perception that maybe we are really not committed to this fight against corruption and that is also very worrying. It undermines the confidence that we have overall in our commitment to governance.”

Background

On Friday, May 17, the news emerged that Mr Amidu had petitioned President Akufo-Addo seeking the removal of the incumbent Special Prosecutor.

The petition, dated April 30, 2024, was subsequently conveyed to the Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkonoo on May 6, 2024.

Mr Amidu alleges procurement breaches in the purchase of vehicles for the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and abuses involving judges and the administration of justice.

Other allegations include violations of citizens’ rights through arrests and detentions, violations of the right to information, and improper appointments of personnel to the office.

Chief Justice asks Kissi Agyebeng to respond to impeachment allegations

Meanwhile, the Chief Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo, has instructed the Special Prosecutor Kissi Agyebeng to provide his comments on the matters raised in a petition seeking his impeachment. According to her, this step is crucial in determining the appropriate course of action to be taken regarding the impeachment process.

Per the directive, the Chief Justice underscored the judiciary’s commitment to upholding due process and fairness in handling the matters.

“This is to forward to you a copy of the petition dated 30th April 2024 sent to the Office of the President which was forwarded to the Office of the Honourable Lady Chief Justice on 6 May 2024.

“Kindly provide your comments to the matters raised to enable the Honourable Chief Justice to determine if a prima facie case has been made out,” portions of the letter said.

ALSO READ:

• You can’t judge Kissi Agyebeng by your ‘low standards’ – Martin Amidu told

• Allow legal processes to take place in Kissi Agyebeng’s impeachment case – Vitus Azeem

Mr Suhuyini contends that, Mr Amidu lacks the authority to dictate who succeeds him and how they carry out their duties.

He dismisses Amidu’s assessment of Agyebeng’s performance, arguing that his “low standards” cannot serve as the benchmark for evaluating Mr Agyebeng.

Speaking on JoyNews’ Newsfile programme on Saturday, May 18, Suhuyini, who also serves as the Ranking Member on Parliament’s Lands and Forestry Committee, rebuked Amidu for his actions.

He criticised the former Special Prosecutor for his apparent bitterness towards individuals who surpass him, attributing it to Amidu’s failure to deliver during his tenure.

According to Mr Suhuyini, Amidu’s petition reflects his resentment towards those who outshine him, highlighting his inability to fulfill his responsibilities effectively.

“Mr Martin Amidu’s standards are not the ones by which we should judge Kissi Agyebeng’s performance because Mr Martin Amidu’s standards are low. And in his petition, he seems to be suggesting that his standard was the best standard and that was the way Kissi Agyebeng should have proceeded and that again in my view is typical Martin Amidu for you.”

Following the revelation that Martin Amidu had petitioned President Akufo-Addo to remove the current Special Prosecutor, news circulated rapidly.

Mr Amidu’s petition, dated April 30, 2024, was swiftly forwarded to Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo on May 6, 2024, indicating the seriousness with which the matter was regarded.

In his petition, Mr Amidu cited procurement irregularities in the acquisition of vehicles for the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and alleged misconduct involving judges and the administration of justice.

Moreover, he raised concerns about infringements on citizens’ rights through arrests and detentions, violations of the right to information, and questionable appointments within the OSP.

The NDC MP is of the view that Mr Amidu’s actions have given President Akufo-Addo the opportunity to remove yet another independent officer who’s not in the good books of the government.

Chief Justice asks Kissi Agyebeng to respond to impeachment allegations

Meanwhile, the Chief Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo, has instructed the Special Prosecutor Kissi Agyebeng to provide his comments on the matters raised in a petition seeking his impeachment. According to the her, this step is crucial in determining the appropriate course of action to be taken regarding the impeachment process.

Per the directive, the Chief Justice underscored the judiciary’s commitment to upholding due process and fairness in handling the matters.

“This is to forward to you a copy of the petition dated 30th April 2024 sent to the Office of the President which was forwarded to the Office of the Honourable Lady Chief Justice on 6 May 2024.

“Kindly provide your comments to the matters raised to enable the Honourable Chief Justice to determine if a prima facie case has been made out,” portions of the letter said.

ALSO READ:

• Martin Amidu files petition to remove Special Prosecutor

• Martin Kpebu reacts to impeachment petition against Kissi Agyabeng [Listen]

Speaking on Joy FM’s News File, Madam Clinton argued that the petition, while detailed, fails to present a compelling case for an investigation or the formation of a committee to look into it.

While acknowledging the procurement issue being raised by Mr Amidu, she believes that alone may not be sufficient to establish a prima facie case for further action.

She referred to the Special Prosecutor Act of 2017, which stipulates that a special prosecutor can be removed for misconduct, incompetence, or actions that bring the office into disrepute.

However, she contended that the grounds outlined by Mr Amidu do not meet these criteria.

“Mr Amidu’s petition, although well laid out, does not go far enough to justify an investigation or a committee being set up because I don’t think a prima facie case necessarily exists apart from the procurement issue,” she said on Saturday.

She emphasised that while the office of the Special Prosecutor is responsible for investigating procurement issues, the petition must prove that Mr Agyebeng himself committed a crime to warrant removal.

The lawyer further dismissed other allegations, such as inducing staff from sister law enforcement agencies, as insufficient grounds for impeachment.

Drawing from her experience with the Attorney General’s department, she argued that recruiting top talent from various agencies, including the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), is a standard practice aimed at enhancing the effectiveness of the Special Prosecutor’s office.

“Making efforts such as that to ensure convictions cannot be a ground for impeachment at all,” she emphasised.

Reinforcing her belief that the procurement issue is the only potentially valid concern in Mr Amidu’s petition, Madam Clinton however, noted that Amidu’s petition lacks the necessary substance to warrant serious consideration for removing Special Prosecutor, Kissi Agyebeng.

Background

On Friday, May 17, the news emerged that Mr Amidu had petitioned President Akufo-Addo seeking the removal of the incumbent Special Prosecutor.

The petition, dated April 30, 2024, was subsequently conveyed to the Chief Justice, Gertrude Torkonoo on May 6, 2024.

Mr Amidu alleges procurement breaches in the purchase of vehicles for the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and abuses involving judges and the administration of justice.

Other allegations include violations of citizens’ rights through arrests and detentions, violations of the right to information, and improper appointments of personnel to the office.

Chief Justice asks Kissi Agyebeng to respond to impeachment allegations

Meanwhile, the Chief Justice Gertrude Sackey Torkornoo, has instructed the Special Prosecutor Kissi Agyebeng to provide his comments on the matters raised in a petition seeking his impeachment.

In a letter dated Thursday, May 16, Chief Justice Torkornoo emphasised the importance of Agyebeng’s input in addressing the issues outlined in the petition.

According to the CJ, this step is crucial in determining the appropriate course of action to be taken regarding the impeachment process.

Per the directive, the Chief Justice underscored the judiciary’s commitment to upholding due process and fairness in handling the matters.

“This is to forward to you a copy of the petition dated 30th April 2024 sent to the Office of the President which was forwarded to the Office of the Honourable Lady Chief Justice on 6 May 2024.

“Kindly provide your comments to the matters raised to enable the Honourable Chief Justice to determine if a prima facie case has been made out,” portions of the letter said.

ALSO READ:

• Tamale North MP accuses Akufo-Addo of scheming to oust Kissi Agyebeng from office

• Samson Lardy wades into Kissi Agyebeng’s impeachment petition

Speaking on Joy FM’s Super Morning Show, Mr Anyenini said the former Special Prosecutor’s incessant criticism makes him look like someone jealous of the success of Mr Agyabeng.

“The previous office holder [Martin Amidu] has made it clear since he left office that he does not support the appointment of Kissi Agyabeng as the Special Prosecutor.

“He has provided some of the flimsiest excuses for why Agyabeng should not hold the position. His attack on the institution after his departure feels like the reaction of someone aggrieved because another person is succeeding where he failed and does not want to see them succeed,” he said on Friday.

This was after news broke that Mr Amidu had petitioned President Akufo-Addo seeking the removal of the incumbent Special Prosecutor.

The petition, dated April 30, 2024, was subsequently conveyed to Chief Justice Gertrude Torkonoo on May 6, 2024.

Mr Amidu alleges procurement breaches in the purchase of vehicles for the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and abuses involving judges and the administration of justice. Other allegations include violations of citizens’ rights through arrests and detentions, violations of the right to information, and improper appointments of personnel to the office.

Although he does not agree with Mr Amidu, the Newsfile host expressed satisfaction with the established procedure for impeaching the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP).

He stressed that it prevents unilateral decisions.

ALSO READ:

• Nonsense – Kweku Baako’s reaction to Kissi Agyabeng’s impeachment petition

• Chief Justice seeks response from Special Prosecutor on impeachment

His comment follows a petition forwarded by President Akufo-Addo to the Chief Justice seeking to remove Mr. Kissi Agyebeng as Special Prosecutor.

The petition, dated April 30, 2024, was sent to the President by former Special Prosecutor Martin Amidu and conveyed to Justice Gertrude Torkornoo on May 6, 2024.

Mr. Amidu alleges procurement breaches in the purchase of vehicles for the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and abuses involving judges and the administration of justice.

Other allegations include violations of citizens’ rights through arrests and detentions, violations of the right to information, and improper appointments of personnel to the office.

Speaking to the JoyNews AM show on May 17, Mr. Domelevo said “I have stated time and again that if you fight corruption, corruption will fight you back using any means available, so it is not a surprise to me at all.”

He is rather surprised at where it is coming from, Martin Amidu, whom Mr. Kissi Agyebeng succeeded as the OSP.

Responding to why he would describe Mr. Amidu’s action as corruption fighting corruption, Mr. Domelevo shot back and maintained it is not at all surprising.

“You have no idea how corruption fights. Corruption is not going to be fought using corrupt methods. It is going to pretend and use what looks like very genuine reasons, and I always say that there is a story behind a story, so the story behind the story is difficult for all of us to know, but what I am just trying to say is that to me, if you are in the public domain fighting people, others may also look for an opportunity to fight you back.

“Where it’s coming from is what surprises me. You know Martin is my very good friend, but we have different values. And I would not participate in any form or shape in the removal of my successor from office. In fact, in his case, even I can say that he resigned. I don’t think Kissi Agyebeng played role in it. I suspect the one who succeeded me had a role to play but I will not play any role as such,” he said.

According to Mr. Domelevo, apart from the case being odd because of who the petitioner is, it may also lend credence to suspicions, as earlier suggested by some commentators on the matter, that the move was motivated by perceptions that current Special Prosecutor Kissi Agyebeng is outshining his predecessor.

“You know at times, somethings you can do, but you leave it to other people to do it because, like Senanu is alluding to, it looks like because he is outshining him, so he wants to remove him out of office, which to me I will not allow such a situation to arise before people will impute those intentions into my actions,” he noted.

On the allegation of procurement breaches levelled against the OSP, and whether it serves any hint of the fate of the impeachment petition, Mr. Domelevo said the prosecuting authorities apply the procurement laws only when it serves their interest, pointing to serious allegations against the presidency and the Electoral Commission that have been overlooked.

“The pattern is that they use the procurement offences only when it suits them. Didn’t we hear about procurement offences by the EC, the current EC, and several others, even the presidency itself and how do they treat them? They are treated with kid gloves. It’s only when you are on the other side, you are not liked then they activate the procurement offence against you. I know that nobody is above the aw and everybody is supposed to go according to the law but then the selectiveness, the selectivity in using this procurement law is becoming one too many. Several huge procurement offences are known to all of us and are not being addressed but they pick on individuals who they think they should pick on and they talk about procurement offences. I’m not saying that that justifies the procurement offence if there is any…”

READ ALSO:

• COP Maame Tiwaa chairs Anti-Corruption Agencies in Commonwealth Africa
• Martin Kpebu reacts to impeachment petition against Kissi Agyabeng [Listen]
• Martin Amidu files petition to remove Special Prosecutor

The petition, dated April 30, 2024, was sent to the President by former Special Prosecutor Martin Amidu and conveyed to Justice Gertrude Torkonoo on May 6, 2024.

Mr Amidu alleges procurement breaches in the purchase of vehicles for the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and abuses involving judges and the administration of justice.

Other allegations include violations of citizens’ rights through arrests and detentions, violations of the right to information, and improper appointments of personnel to the office.

Joy News has gathered that, as required by Article 146 of the Constitution, the Chief Justice is in the process of deciding if there is a prima facie case to establish a committee for Mr. Agyabeng’s impeachment.

Sources indicate that may be related to an explosive press conference held by the Special Prosecutor, during which he alleged that judges had conspired against him.

For instance, former Attorney General and Minister for Justice Martin Amidu alleges that Mr Agyabeng’s press conference complaints about the judiciary constitute abuse of judges and bring the Judiciary into disrepute.

This impeachment process follows reports that the Special Prosecutor declined demands to resign and instead held a press conference to express frustrations with his work.

Mr. Amidu also claims that by arresting individuals such as Cecilia Dapaah and Prof. Frimpong Boateng, the Special Prosecutor abused their rights.

Additionally, he alleges a violation of the right to information when Mr Agyabeng requested appointment letters and salary details of all OSP staff to be put on a pen drive for him, as well as issues with the appointment of personnel to the office.

ALSO READ:

Cedi depreciation shot up cement prices – COCMAG

I will change the President if… – Kofi Amoabeng

My father loves education – Asantehene’s daughter

In a lengthy statement, Mr Amidu said passing the bill into law will be a political suicide Akufo-Addo will not commit.

“As I told my interlocutors then, “self-preservation is the first law of nature” and Nana Akufo-
Addo will be committing suicide to assent the LGBTQ+ Bill passed by Parliament into law.

“Nana Akufo-Addo’s long game, the aura he has built around himself as a democrat in the
western tradition, and all the ingratiation efforts he has invested in, will come to nought
should he assent to the Bill upon passage. The fact that other citizens closely watching the
Ghanaian political scene knew the difficulty the Bill was going to face when it got to the desk
of the President was articulated by no less a person than Minority Leader Ato Forson,” portions of the statement read.

In his view, anybody who presumed Akufo-Addo will assent to the bill has not studied his political biography before and upon his assumption of office as President.

According to him, the president has worked effortlessly to look good in the eyes of Western leaders, and will not soil that reputation by stooping low to sign the bill.

“I had no doubt in my mind that no admonishment from any quarters, religious,
cultural, social, or otherwise would persuade Nana Akufo-Addo to sign it when presented to
him. Those who had conversations with me long before Parliament began to consider and to
pass the Bill will confirm my position on this matter,” it added.

President Akufo-Addo’s in the past days has come under fierce criticisms over his declaration on the controversial bill which was passed on Wednesday, February 28, 2024.

On Tuesday, March 5, a journalist cum lawyer, Richard Dela Sky filed a lawsuit against Parliament at the Supreme Court regarding the passage of the anti-LGBTQ+ bill.

The reliefs sought by the journalist include an order restraining President Akufo-Addo from assenting to the bill and also preventing the “Speaker of Parliament and the Clerk to Parliament from presenting ‘The Human and Sexual Values Bill, 2024’ to the President of the Republic for his assent.”

This was barely 24 hours after Akufo-Addo revealed that the Bill is facing a legal challenge at the Supreme Court and that until a decision is arrived at, no action would be taken by his government on the private Member’s bill.

Addressing concerns during a diplomatic engagement on March 4 at Peduase, the President emphasised that Ghana remains steadfast in its long-standing reputation for respecting human rights and adherence to the rule of law.

He reassured the international community of Ghana’s commitment to upholding human rights despite the passage of the bill.

ALSO READ:

• Anti-LGBTQI+ Bill: You don’t need Supreme Court verdict to assent – Akufo-Addo told [Video]

• Anti-LGBTQI+ Bill: AriseGhana threatens demo against Akufo-Addo

Click here to read the full take:

The outcome for the 4 November 2023 NPP congress and presidential primaries is certain – Nana Akufo-Addo’s anointed candidate, Mahamudu Bawumia, will be nominated for the 2024 Presidential Elections as programmed.

Nana Akufo-Addo has been rehearsing with his family and friends his paranoid dream on assuming the office of the President of Ghana on 7 January 2017 to demonstrate that it is possible to skew Ghana’s Constitutional and democratic system with the empty shell appearance of a free election without the concomitant substance of fairness and transparency underpinning true constitutionalism, democracy, and the rule of law.

The beneficiaries of his abuse of public office to ingratiate and corrupt all forms of resistance to his long game is testified to in secret by some of the recipients of the showers of booties and sinecures of appointments from this Government since its assumption of office from 2017 and going forward to the 2024 elections.

The old and tested system of divide and rule has been perfected with both carrots of potential and actual benefits and sticks of intimidation and deprivation of personal liberty including life as instruments of governance and interfering with free and fair elections.

The stage was set to conduct a pilot study using the NPP’s super delegates’ conference to test the machinery for the actualization of the long game for breaking the 8 by hook or crook.

The 26 August 2023 NPP primaries, (supper delegates’ conference), to prune
down the 10 candidates who did not believe in my intelligence and security analysis that Mahamudu Bawumia is the only candidate Nana Akufo-Addo’s Family and Friends’ Government will unequivocally support to represent the party at the 2024 Presidential elections came to pass with my vindication that the internal primaries were only intended to coronate the chosen and establishment candidate amongst the contestants.

Alan Kyeremanten and Boakye Agyarko have already told the unbeliever of Nana Akufo-Addo and his Family and Friends’ Government agenda of their experiences of how the long game was actualised at the 26 August 2023 NPP super delegates’ conference to need further narration by me.

The other seven contestants of the 26 August 2023 contest have also expressed their disappointing experiences. The remaining three contestants against

Nana Akufo-Addo’s chosen one on 4 November 2024 has since been touring the country and sharing their fears for the direct government and NPP interference with the level playing field for a free and fair election for that day.

The lamentations of unfairness by the three (3) remaining contestants against the Nana Akufo-Addo chosen heir to contest the 2024 Presidential elections, his Vice President, Mahamudu Bawumia, have persisted since the 26 August 2023 super delegates’ conference.

On Monday 23 October 2023, Francis Addai Nimoh bewailed what he says is intimidation and coercion of delegates ahead of the 4 November 2023 Presidential primaries when he stated in an interview on the Ghana Kasa program reported on Ghana Web, inter alia, that:
“…. We want to break the eight-year governance cycle under the Fourth Republic and by so doing make history.

“So, we can’t use the same old way to achieve what we’ve set before us. We have to adopt a new way of doing things to make the party attractive once again. There should be respect and love among party members. If we intimidate, coerce, and utter divisive comments the party will not have unity and will suffer in 2024.”

On the same day, Wednesday 25 October 2023, Dr. Afriyie Akoto expressed his worries that engineering favours for only one candidate at the 4 November 2023 NPP Congress to elect its presidential candidate could have detrimental consequences.

Dr. Akoto stated in his interview on Joy News and report in Ghana Web, inter alia, that:

“But we have rules and regulations which say that if you are a party official you don’t come out to say that you are supporting this person or that person but look at what is happening.

“The whole government, the whole parliament, the whole party, most of the party managers, and so on have come out openly to say that they support one person and it goes against the rules. So, there is something wrong with the party.”

The President of Ghana under whose watch the internal NPP’s presidential primaries are being held by his party on 4 November 2023 ignored the concerns of the three contesting candidates against anointing his Vice President as his successor when on the occasion of a visit on 26 October 2023 to the Jubilee House by pupils and teachers of the Association International School, the President signaled and instructed the NPP delegates as to who to vote for as his preferred candidate at the impending Congress and primaries.

Citinewsroom reported on 27 October 2023, online that:
“Nana Akufo-Addo on why he picked Bawumia as his running mate – President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo has shed light on the reasons behind his choice of Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia as his running mate, a decision that has played a pivotal role in the country’s political landscape.”

The President was reported to have made insinuations to regional balance with the main objective of drawing attention to the 4 November 2023 primaries and to the fact that the three remaining candidates were all from Southern Ghana with Mahamudu Bawumia, his Vice President, being the only candidate from Northern Ghana when he said:

“In terms of the balance, people from the south, people from the north…I think that for the unity of the country, it is good that we have a leadership where Northerners and Southerners are together so that the country can remain united….

He [Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia] is an honest person. He speaks honestly to you. He is not one of those people who you have to guess what they are trying to say, he says what he has to say directly.”

President Nana Akufo-Addo used similar preferential language to favour Mahamudu Bawumia before the 26 August 2023 pruning down conference, and he is at his paranoid long game again without scruples.

I was not surprised when Edward Ennim on 27 October 2023, repeated on Okay FM the charges of abuse of the financial resources at the presidency in manipulating both the 26 August 2023 NPP primaries and the final one slated for 4 November 2023.

Mr. Ennim was reported on Ghana Web of 28 October 2023 to have “…. highlighted the potential financial implications of these alleged actions, stating that the substantial sums withdrawn from government coffers for this purpose could push the country toward bankruptcy.”

Mr.. Ennim is quoted in the report as having said that:
“Three days ago, someone called me, a whole Chief Executive Officer who was an NDC member previously, was given money to distribute to the delegates in the North – Tamale and Bolga.

“I was like I wish people would go and confront him to rob him. They are using CEOs, board chairmen, and certain ministers to distribute money. In the November 4 election that is what they are doing so if you have a genuine candidate, will you be using money? I am saying that by the time they will finish this election, NPP, already the bankrupt state we are in, will be two times worse, so whoever becomes president, if you don’t go after such people for the money, you can never succeed because where would you get the money to work?

“While Ghana is broke, individuals have the cash, so if you come to power and you don’t chase them for the money, then less than one year of your stay in power will result in an uprising.”

Kennedy Ohene Agyapong, who many Ghanaians and the rank and file of the NPP consider to be the leading candidate against Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, Nana Akufo Addo’s handpicked candidate to succeed him at the 4 November 2023 congress, on 30 October 2023 confirmed his apprehensions for a rigged election when he was reported on mynewsgh.com to have warned that:

“I am sending a nice caution to both the police personnel and the Electoral Commissions that they should not be pushed by any government officials or any Regional Chairman because if they push, I will also push. If there will be no fairness and transparency during the presidential primaries, I can’t promise them but I will continue to give them showdown since NPP needs fairness to unite the party.”

As though his warning was not enough, Kennedy Agyapong threw a bombshell about attempts to bribe him from contesting the primaries when he was reported to have said that:

“The money they offered is $800 million if he doesn’t know. He should ask Mr Oppong Bio if that is what they are saying but I said no I will not step down, Ghana first. In 2016, you people were not able to buy pickups. How come today you are able to offer me $800 million? So I said I won’t step down….” .

This allegation has been denied by spokespersons for Mahamudu Bawumia in spite of the witness to the events named by Kennedy Agyapong.

The track record of this President and Government in mothering the canker of corruption makes it impossible to disbelieve Mr. Agyapong’s allegation without a Government Commission of Enquiry to investigate the Kennedy Agyapong bribery allegations.

An analysis of the open source security and intelligence materials on elections since the 2020 elections supports the questions raised about the Electoral Commission’s impartiality as a result of appointments based on the letter of the 1992 Constitution without animations from its spirit, and the suppression of the opposing views of all other political parties who disagreed with the appointments.

The security and intelligence system has been stacked with carefully selected leaders and operatives with proven political party affiliations. The legislature has been the subject of manipulation with the use of blackmail and ingratiation.

The public indices of trust point to perceptions of a high level of a compromised third arm of Government which has not been helped with past and recent appointments to it, and the delays and timing of its output in urgent matters for constitutional adjudication.

Nature’s justice has been the only obstacle reminding Nana Akufo-Addo and his family and friends that in all things, man may propose, but nature also disposes.

In spite of the razor-thin victory at the 2020 Presidential elections resulting from manipulations of the electoral and constitutional system, Nana Akufo-Addo has learned no lesson that man succeeds only when the variable of nature allows him.

Kennedy Ohene Agyapong may be a grassroots preference of the NPP, but Nana Akufo-Addo cannot trust him sufficiently to hand over power to him in the agenda to break the 8.

Mahamudu Bawumia is a safe pair of hands to give Nana Akufo-Addo the third term in office he seeks using a surrogate.

Whether Nana Akufo-Addo will succeed in actualizing his long game with Mahamudu Bawumia at the 2024 elections will unfold after his nomination on 4 November 2023. Nature’s justice will ultimately determine the final verdict.

After excelling in unlawfully fishing for evidence to prosecute citizens in violation of the enjoyment of their fundamental rights and freedoms to personal liberty and presumption of innocence, Kissi Agyebeng has now graduated to fishing for a court and a judge to do his bidding in the investigation and prosecution of all cases he prosecutes before the courts of Ghana. 

Almost half of my 45 years as a lawyer were spent professionally investigating, prosecuting, or directing the prosecution of all manner of criminal offences under the laws of Ghana under the authority of the Attorney-General.

I do not recall any moment in which any Attorney-General petitioned the Chief Justice to recuse or remove a Justice of the Superior Court presiding over a criminal matter on grounds of prejudice against the Republic of Ghana or the person the Attorney-General or an authorized officer of the Office of the Attorney-General. 

Wonders, they say, will never end. I was pleasantly surprised, therefore, when a media person left an SMS message on my phone on 12 October 2023 at 11:12 am indicating an intention to speak to me during the 12 O’clock news on an alleged petition written by the Special Prosecutor to the Chief Justice to remove the judge presiding over the case involving Cecilia Abena Dapaah and her spouse.

I politely declined the temptation put in my path when I had not seen any evidence of the fact that a petition had been made to the Chief Justice as alleged. 

 It was later that I read online a news item of even date written by one Emmanuel Ebo Hawkson posted on graphiconline.com at 10:35 am reporting that: 

“Justice Twum informed the court today that he had received a letter by the OSP to the Chief Justice, Justice Gertrude Araba Sackey Torkornoo, for him to recuse himself from the case. In view of the petition, Justice Twum adjourned the case to await the decision of the Chief Justice on the petition.” 

Attached to the news report was a terse statement issued by the Special Prosecutor notifying the public on Facebook that: 

“The OSP has requested the Chief Justice to recuse and remove His Lordship Justice Edward Twum from all cases involving the OSP pending before him.

The request is grounded on the OSP’s well-founded belief that Justice Edward Twum appears to be highly prejudiced against the OSP and the person of the Special Prosecutor.

Consequently, as it stands, the OSP would not and cannot be reasonably expected to be parties to proceedings before the said judge.” 

 “Wonders will never end”, indeed! And “if we do not die early we shall see things”. The cases put before the High Court (Financial & Economic Crime Division 2), Accra, presided over by Mr. Justice Twum are not between the Special Prosecutor in his personal capacity and the suspect, Cecilia Abena Dapaah, and her spouse.

This used to be Mrs. Justice Afia Serwah Asare-Botwe’s court which handled almost all criminal cases and applications from the OSP during and after my tenure as the founding Special Prosecutor before her elevation to the Court of Appeal. 

The cases are in substance between the Republic of Ghana, and Cecilia Dapaah and her spouse.

As a quasi-judicial law enforcement and prosecutorial office assisting the courts to administer criminal justice as demanded under the 1992 Constitution the OSP and the Special Prosecutor have no personal or vested interest in the outcome of cases presented before the superior court to engender prejudice or bias against the OSP or the person of the Special Prosecutor. 

Every civic-minded citizen will recall that on 31 August 2023, Mr. Justice Twum speaking ex-cathedral in a ruling in the application styled the Special Prosecutor vs Cecilia Abena Dapaah, in which the Special Prosecutor represented the Republic of Ghana, declined an application for an order(s) for the confirmation of the seizure and freezing of the property of Cecilia Abena Dapaah and made consequential orders thereto.

The Special Prosecutor, Kissi Agyebeng, unethically and unprofessionally issued a public notice to the media disagreeing with the decision and orders of the High Court.

Mr. Kissi Agyebeng knowing very well that he had no legal grounds to appeal against the ruling and orders of the High Court did not file an appeal against the ruling and orders of the court.

The Special Prosecutor, a public officer, paid and protected at the expense of the taxpayer was merely engaged in grandstanding in the media to spite the court for its ruling, pure and simple. 

As a sequel to his unethical, unprofessional, and unconstitutional conduct, Kissi Agyebeng, the Special Prosecutor on 5 September 2023 having put his house in order (or disorder) filed a fresh and rehashed application in the High Court on behalf of the Republic of Ghana again styled the Special Prosecutor v 1. Cecilia Abena Dapaah and 2 Daniel Osei Kufuor for an order for the confirmation of the seizure and freezing of the subject matter of his earlier dismissed application with the hearing date fixed far away to 18 October 2023. Cecilia Dapaah and her spouse as Respondents filed their affidavit opposing the Republic of Ghana’s application against them. They also applied to the court to abridge the hearing set for 18 October 2023 to an earlier date which was set down for hearing on 11 October 2023. 

The Special Prosecutor who had taken the long date of 18 October 2023 in the hope of continuing to have possession of the seized and frozen property of the Respondents and to fish for his preferred court and a judge to hear the application was disappointed when incidentally, the judicial administration listed the Republic’s application for orders confirming the seizure and freezing of the property of Cecilia Dapaah and her spouse before the High Court (Financial & Economic Crimes Division 2) Accra, presided over by Mr. Justice Twum.

Any experienced prosecutor should have known that it is normal and routine in the administration of criminal justice for such a case to be listed before the court which had been assigned responsibility for the earlier case for purposes of consistency.

Indeed, this was the same court then presided over by Mrs. Justice Asare-Botwe which in a ruling dated 12 July 2023 dismissed an earlier application by the Republic against the property of Sir John in the case the Special Prosecutor v 1. Charles Owusu and 2. Nana Boakye Acheampong, popularly known as the Sir John case. 

The Respondent’s application for an early hearing was accordingly heard on 11 October 2023 with the presiding judge making a ruling setting down the hearing of the application for an order or orders for the confirmation filed by the Applicant on 5 September 2023 to the next day, 12 October 2023. The Special Prosecutor or his authorized officers did not object to the 

court or the judge hearing or continuing with the cases on grounds of real likelihood of bias or prejudice against the Republic of Ghana at the hearing of the case on 11 October 2023 to enable the court to make a ruling on any such objection. 

The Special Prosecutor, apparently, as part of his tacit bargaining in the media and the court of public opinion to influence the outcome of the cases of the Republic pending before the High Court, again unlawfully, unethically and unprofessionally issued a notice to the public and also on the X platform on 11 October 2023 at 11:27 am informing the whole world that the OSP and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in the United States of America have initiated concurrent investigations into the activities of former Sanitation Minister, Cecilia Abena Dapaah and her associates “primarily focus on examining their assets and financial transactions within the United States of America.” 

During my tenure as the founding Special Prosecutor of the OSP, Mrs. Justice Afia Serwah Asare-Botwe presiding over the same High Court (Financial & Economic Crime Division 2) Accra, was assigned, heard almost all the applications for orders to confirm seizures and freezing of property, and the presided over the trial of charges against accused persons that were filed on behalf of the Republic by the Special Prosecutor.

She made several adverse rulings and judgments in the cases brought before her by the OSP against the Republic as it was her prerogative to do without any obnoxious publications in the media by me, as the Special Prosecutor calling into question any of her decisions. (See, for instance, the various applications and cases in the Republic v Mahama Ayariga & Another and the Republic v Hajia Hawa Ninchiama & 6 Others decided by Mrs. Justice Asare-Botwe). 

But when Mrs Justice Afia Serwah Asare-Botwe presiding over the same High Court (Financial & Economic Crime Division 2) Accra declined Special Prosecutor, Kissi Agyebeng’s application in the Special Prosecutor v 1. Charles Owusu and 2. Nana Boakye Acheampong, popularly known as Sir John case on 12 July 2022 incurred his umbrage and an appeal to the Court of Appeal which he has since refused or failed to pursue.

My considered and published article on the conduct of the Special Prosecutor at that time is available online and on my website. 

Ghanaians will recall that on 29 July 2023, I had occasion again to publish a considered article entitled: “The Kissi Agyebeng’s OSP picks people that he thinks that he should, rather than pick the cases that need to be prosecuted”. In that article, I questioned the professional experience and competence of Kissi Agyebeng as Special Prosecutor and stated inter alia that: 

“….the deficiencies in the investigatory and prosecutorial experience of Mr. Kissi Agyebeng is what has haunted him into overdrive to think that he can earn the trust of Ghanaians by appearing to talk tough and threatening to investigate and prosecute “everyone and every person” on mere suspicion …. without first establishing reasonable grounds for such suspicion as though he was on a fishing expedition.” (Emphasis supplied). 

The petition of Kissi Agyebeng to the Chief Justice of which he gave public notice in the media on 12 October 2023 for the recusal and removal of the court and the judge assigned by the Judicial Service to determine criminal cases and applications he had filed in the High Court after having lost his cases in the rulings on 31 August 2023 and the ruling on the Respondent’s application for abridgement of time on 12 October 2023 is clear confirmation of his deficiencies and inexperience as an investigator and prosecutor of criminal cases on 

behalf of the Republic of Ghana. This time round Kissi Agyebeng has resorted to fishing for a court and a judge who would decide cases in his favour instead of in accordance with the law. Kissi Agyebeng is more competent, experienced and excels in the persecution of citizens presumed innocent under the Constitution in the court of public opinion than at an adversarial trial before a court of law. 

The more pernicious and arbitrary conduct and intention of Kissi Agyebeng as the Special Prosecutor is to unduly delay the hearing of the criminal cases and applications he has before the Court so that he can postpone decisions by the court in those matters which may expose his professional incompetence and inexperience as an investigator and a prosecutor to the Ghanaian public again.

This is a clear unlawful and unconstitutional conduct unbecoming of any professional and responsible public officer which I had hitherto not witnessed from any experienced and competent professional investigator and prosecutor appearing in court as officer of the court. 

One thing is certain, Justice will eventually prevail. In the interim, I bet my last pesewa that should the Chief Justice decline the OSP’s petition, Kissi Agyebeng will formally repeat his petition as an objection before the court again for the simple purpose of postponing the decision or judgment days.

This will enable him to frustrate the administration of justice by holding on to the property and bank accounts of the Respondents he administratively seized and froze again on 5 September 2023 for as long as he unlawfully can.

Whatever the delays and fishing for a court and a judge the petition of the Special Prosecutor occasions, justice will eventually prevail even if those cases were put before any other court and judge of the superior courts and the heavens fall. 

Martin A. B. K. Amidu 

12 October 2023 

According to him, late Director of Research at the Presidency, Victor Newman aborted the discussions to assassinate him.

He claimed President Nana Akufo-Addo’s undercover operatives and agents were unleashed on his residence at the dawn of Monday 3 July 2023 at 2:15 am for defending persons whose constitutional rights to personal liberty are being trampled upon by their surrogates.

“These threats intensify any time I exercise my right to defend the Constitution just as I did recently on 28 June 2023 and 30 June 2023 resulting in a covert attack on my residence at 2:15 am, dawn yesterday, Monday 3 July 2023,” he claimed.

The former Attorney General made the disclosure in a statement while reacting to a directive by the New Patriotic Party (NPP) for its communicators to refrain from attacking the Dormaahene over his comments on the trial of Assin North MP, James Gyakye Quayson.

“The distinguished and eminent chief of the Dormaas is lucky that the communicators attacked only his personality on air and their superiors have seen the danger it poses for the NPP in the 2024 elections,” portions of the statement read.

Mr Amidu noted he shall not back down from defending the 1992 Constitution as he is enjoined to do as a citizen of Ghana.

“No Ghanaian patriot must be cowed by the threats of those violating the Constitution,” he advised.

However, he added, “As I said in November 2020, the President, Nana Akufo-Addo is ultimately responsible for anything violent that befalls me or my residence.”

ALSO READ:

• Martin Amidu: Akufo-Addo must stop unleashing thugs on citizens who exercise right to speech

• ‘Inexperienced’ Kissi Agyebeng has refused or failed to learn – Martin Amidu

Below is the full statement:

NANA AKUFO-ADDO SHOULD STOP UNLEASHING HIS THUGS ON CITIZENS WHO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH: MARTIN A. B. K. AMIDU

Did I read from Ghana Web a report yesterday that the New Patriotic Party communication directorate has told their communicators that: “Communicators should not attack the personality of the chief though, we disagree with his call for the president to intervene or interfere with the independent work of the judiciary…”?

The distinguished and eminent chief of the Dormaas is lucky that the communicators attacked only his personality on air and their superiors have seen the danger it poses for the NPP in the 2024 elections.

In my case, Nana Akufo-Addo’s undercover operatives and agents were unleashed on my residence at the dawn of yesterday, Monday 3 July 2023 at 2:15 am for saying the same thing and defending persons whose constitutional rights to personal liberty are being trampled upon by their surrogates.

I have lived under threats of assassination, armed robbery, and the burning of my house, from this regime since 16 November 2020.

The late Victor Newman aborted the discussions to assassinate me then.

These threats intensify any time I exercise my right to defend the Constitution just as I did recently on 28 June 2023 and 30 June 2023 resulting in a covert attack on my residence at 2:15 am, dawn yesterday, Monday 3 July 2023.

As I said in November 2020, the President, Nana Akufo-Addo is ultimately responsible for anything violent that befalls me or my residence.

I shall not back down from defending the 1992 Constitution as I am enjoined to do as a citizen of Ghana. No Ghanaian patriot must be cowed by the threats of those violating the Constitution.

Blame Akufo-Addo if I’m harmed – Amidu, as he warns gov’t to ‘stop the attacks before we wash dirty linen in public’

In 202, Mr Amidu said if he was harmed in any way or killed, President Nana Akufo-Addo must be blamed for it.

According to him, he had been the target of threats of harm ever since he left office in connection with his corruption and anti-corruption risk assessment report on the controversial Agyapa Royalties deal.

Mr Amidu, who resigned from office as the Special Prosecutor on Monday, 16 November 2020, served notice to the Akufo-Addo government in an audio note that if the attacks on him do not cease, he would be forced to come out to defend his integrity “without fear or favour” and damn the consequences.

“Please, I have said since I left office that I was not going to do any fresh interviews about my resignation, I was not going to talk to the press. I am being pushed by so-called responses to me, which contain blatant falsehoods, to speak but I do not want anybody to blame me when I speak out and it becomes unpalatable”, Mr Amidu warned in an exclusive interview with Citi FM’s Umaru Amadu Sanda on Thursday, 19 November 2020.

“So, either the attacks stop or I’ll defend my integrity, even if that means my death. It is something I won by dint of hard work from the PNDC to date and I’m not going to allow anybody, not even the president, to pull that integrity into the mud”, the former Attorney General said.

“I am a poor man who tries to lead a straight and narrow life and crusaded against corruption without asking for payment, so, they will try to destroy me”, the Citizen Vigilante noted, adding: “Anybody who tries to fight corruption must be aware from the beginning that corruption will fight back and all that is going on is corruption fighting back”.

To him, “it is demonstrating that the whole rhetoric about fighting corruption was mere rhetoric”.

“The time for reckoning has come and nobody should push me. I repeat: nobody should push me”, Mr Amidu warned again.

He said: “They should tell their people, who they wrongly briefed to be telling lies about me, to stop before I decide to respond and when I decide to respond, I’ll do so without fear or favour, even to the extent that if my life will be taken for speaking the truth and defending the Constitution of Ghana, as by law established, I’ll do so”.

Mr Amidu stressed that as a private citizen, “nobody can control me and I have a constitutional right too, to defend myself and the Constitution of Ghana, as by law established”, indicating: “Corruption and corruption-related offences are forbidden by the Constitution and assessment of anti-corruption is something allowed under the Constitution and must not be subdued under personal attacks”.

“It must stop”, he emphasised.

Mr Amidu said his critics and detractors must know that he is a “Citizen Vigilante”.

“That is what they must remember”, adding: “All these threats about bugging me, armed robbery, burning my house, I’m aware”.

According to him, several attempts by him to speak to the Minister of National Security, Mr Albert Kan Dapaah, on the threats against him, hit dead ends.

“I tried to call Kan Dapaah, he didn’t pick it and I got a former national security advisor to contact him and tell him that, and I know the persons involved, I can name them but I reserve it for the meantime”, he said.

“I put my life for the republic of Ghana and the president will be responsible for anything that happens to me”, Mr Amidu charged. 

He said there have been a plethora of threats of robbery and arson against him. “The intelligence is there and I called the minister of national security but he didn’t pick and I got a former national security advisor to speak to him and this fact is now known and I say that the president will be responsible for anything that happens to me”.

“I’m a Ghanaian and I don’t fear anything and, as I said, to die in the cause of fighting corruption is what I started with President Jerry Rawlings on 31st December 1982 and I’m not going to leave it because some people think that they can threaten me. I don’t give a damn about that.

“…If they don’t stop, I’ll respond”, he threatened, saying: “As to what I’ll do, I reserve that for myself but as I said, whatever happens to me, I lay my life for the republic of Ghana and the president has a constitutional duty to protect me. I don’t need any security in my house or to follow me. And anybody who makes an attempt, he will have himself to blame”.

Mr Amidu also revealed that his kinsmen were ready to come down south in his defence.

“People have called and want to come in truckloads from Bawku and I told them that what they are hearing is not true because, as a citizen of Ghana, I’m entitled to say my mind and defend the Constitution”.

He wondered why there is so much vitriol against him from people in government following his release of the Agyapa report.

“The fact that you are in government doesn’t mean that when you are dissatisfied about a report, you go after the person or the fellow”, he said, revealing: “The Minister of Finance has been my friend for years; why will I go for him? When I was writing the report, didn’t he come to this house? Was he not here on 21 October? What did I tell him? Why is he now churning our information about me and targets and all that? Should I come out? Let’s stop it and I say let’s stop it before we wash dirty linen in public”.

According to him, such attempts to silence the citizenry are also to prevent people from challenging the weaponisation of the criminal justice system.

Touching on a press statement issued by Mr Dame on Wednesday, the citizen vigilante said this tactic by the governing government is becoming “suffocatingly oppressive and unbearable”.

“The Attorney-General insinuated that legitimate criticisms of the investigatory and prosecutorial functions of his office ‘unduly interferes with the work of State Prosecutors performing their constitutional function of prosecuting crime in Ghana’ without pointing to any provision under the 1992 Constitution which proscribes the sovereign people of Ghana from holding to account State Prosecutors who allow themselves to be misused to abuse the very prosecutorial constitutional function they purport to perform in aid of an oppressive Government whose aim is to weaponise the system of criminal justice administration to achieve electoral political objects in an election cycle,” he added.

His comment comes on the back of an announcement by the AG that his office has taken note of the recent commentary on many high-profile criminal cases which transgresses permissible limits of free speech, unduly interfere with the work of state prosecutors performing their constitutional function of prosecuting crime in Ghana, and tends to put unnecessary pressure on the courts.

In the press release, the AG said some cases that have been the subject of unwarranted public commentary include the Republic vs. James Gyakye Quayson, who is standing trial for perjury, deceit and other charges, Republic vs. Dr Stephen Opuni & 2 Others who are been tried for causing over GH¢217 million financial loss to the state, and Republic vs. Cassiel Ato Forson & 2 Others who are also in court for allegedly causing €2.37 million financial loss to the state.

The statement added that the Office of the Attorney General and Ministry of Justice had observed that some comments on these cases “clearly exceed the bounds of acceptable speech as they seek to disparage prosecutors in the eyes of the public and frustrate prosecution of those cases.”

Again, “some of the comments are orchestrated to pervert the course of justice and/or prejudice the fair hearing and determination of the cases.”

Mr Godfred Dame, therefore, reminded Ghanaians of the principle of equality of all persons before the law as enshrined in Article 17(1) of the Constitution, adding that no person living in Ghana, citizen or non-citizen, is above the laws of Ghana or immune from an application of same.

“The Attorney-General’s constitutional responsibility for the ‘initiation and conduct of all prosecutions of criminal offences’,  implies a duty to prosecute a crime committed in Ghana, after proper investigations have been conducted, irrespective of the political, race, colour, ethnic, religion, economic or social status of the culprit. State Attorneys assisting the Attorney General in the performance of this hallowed constitutional mandate, operate under extreme pressure and are exposed to severe risks.

“They have the right to prosecute cases freely in a court of law just as private legal practitioners enjoy a right to defend their clients, free from abuse and attacks on their character,” the statement concluded.

But rubbishing this stance, Mr Amidu insists that every opinion and view must be respected by the AG.

“One expects the Attorney-General to have realized that the “members of the legal profession of considerable standing” he alluded to in his press release have within them men and women who hold convincing considered opinions and disagree professionally and ethically with the weaponisation of the investigation and prosecution of the processes of criminal justice administration under his watch.

“These “members of the legal profession with considerable standing” include his predecessor Attorneys-General from both political divides who have exercised the discretionary power embodied in the concept of nolle prosequi and know better than an advocacy or appeal to the Attorney-General or the President as the repository of the executive power to order the entry 2 of a nolle prosequi in a criminal case pending in court cannot be prejudicial to the administration of justice,” he said.

Mr Amidu urged the AG to be independent and impartial when it comes to the execution of his role so as to prevent the “negative perceptions or suspicions that he is being used by the President to weaponise the Office of the Attorney-General against political opponents.”

The Minister for Justice and the Attorney-General cannot be allowed to walk away with his penchant of talking down on the sovereign people of Ghana using threats and intimidation to suppress citizens’ right to free speech in criticizing the weaponisation of the process of criminal justice administration entrusted to his care under Article 88 (3) & (4) of the 1992 Constitution with the spurious rhetoric in the name of citizens running “extremely prejudicial commentary on cases pending before the courts”.

The power and discretion of the executive branch to enter a nolle prosequi at any stage of any pending criminal proceeding before judgment, is derived from the prosecutorial powers and discretion of the Attorney-General under Article 88 (3) and (4) of the 1992 Constitution and Section 54 of the Criminal Procedure and Other Offences Act, 1960 (Act 30). The citizen is, therefore, empowered under the Constitution to hold the exercise of that power, like any other executive power, to the test of transparency and accountability through free speech.

The attempt by the Attorney-General through the press release dated 4 July 2023 to use the smokescreen of “prejudicial commentary on cases pending before the courts” to gag the citizens’ fundamental rights and freedoms to challenge the weaponization of the criminal justice system within the investigatory and prosecutorial process to perpetrate the autocratic governance of the Akufo-Addo regime is now becoming suffocatingly oppressive and unbearable.

 The Attorney-General insinuated that legitimate criticisms of the investigatory and prosecutorial functions of his office “unduly interferes with the work of State Prosecutors performing their constitutional function of prosecuting crime in Ghana” without pointing to any provision under the 1992 Constitution which proscribes the sovereign people of Ghana from holding to account State Prosecutors who allow themselves to be misused to abuse the very prosecutorial constitutional function they purport to perform in aid of an oppressive Government whose aim is to weaponize the system of criminal justice administration to achieve electoral political objects in an election cycle. 

Any Attorney-General is deemed to be a person who approaches the duties imposed upon his office under Article 88 (3) and (4) with deep humility and in his quiet and reflective moments engages in reflexive thinking. Consequently, one expects the Attorney-General to have realized that the “members of the legal profession of considerable standing” he alluded to in his press release have within them men and women who hold convincing considered opinions and disagree professionally and ethically with the weaponization of the investigation and prosecution of the processes of criminal justice administration under his watch. 

These “members of the legal profession with considerable standing” include his predecessor Attorneys-General from both political divides who have exercised the discretionary power embodied in the concept of nolle prosequi and know better that an advocacy or appeal to the Attorney-General or the President as the repository of the executive power to order the entry 

of a nolle prosequi in a criminal case pending in court cannot be prejudicial to the administration of justice. 

The above position is vindicated by the late eminent Ghanaian jurist, Justice of the Court of Appeal, Dean of the Faculty of Law of the University of Ghana, Director of Public Prosecutions, and Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr. Justice A N. E. Amissah, writing, in his Criminal Procedure In Ghana, (repeating a truism every seasoned prosecutor knows), that: “The power of the Attorney-General to discontinue a case by the entry of a nolle prosequi or withdrawal is political in nature. No law prescribes the conditions under which it should be exercised or requires that he explain the reasons for doing so….” 

What vested interest does a fair and impartial judiciary hearing a criminal case have in any decision of the Attorney-General to discontinue an action with the entry of a nolle prosequi that a public advocacy for such an action constitutes an interference in the trial of the case?

Is the Attorney-General saying that there is any superior court judge in Ghana who has not achieved the level of maturity and experience to distinguish between urging the Attorney-General to enter a nolle prosequi in a case and comments prejudicial to the administration of justice? 

In the United States of America today one of the most current constitutional disagreement is the indictment of former President Trump by the Department of Justice (DOJ) leading to more scathing criticizing of the DOJ and the Biden administration for weaponizing the administration of justice without threats of persecution by the DOJ hanging over the necks of the eminent lawyers and enlighten citizens for exercising their rights to free speech.

The Americans also have the right to equality before the law and free speech enshrined centuries ago into their Constitution which we adopted in the 1992 Constitution. The United States Attorney-General has never dared to threaten citizens’ right to free speech for urging the executive branch to be decent and exercise prosecutorial discretion in a certain manner.

It is a total insult and slap to the Ghanaian public for the Ghanaian Attorney-General to do so. 

On the same day, 4 July 2023, that the Attorney-General mimicked the President and issued his autocratic press release, the Chiefs of Assin North held a press conference and appealed to the President and the Attorney-General to exercise the nolle prosequi discretion in favour of the beleaguered Member of Parliament for their Constituency following the 27 June 2023 by-election there.

The minority in Parliament on the same day also served notice in the following form to the public: “I wish to serve notice that the entire minority group will accompany our colleague to court today and any other day that he is to appear in court…We are solidarising with our colleague, I urge the government to listen to the good people of Assin North and do the right thing.”

This is exactly what reasonable and experienced former Attorneys-General anticipated and tried to preempt by urging the Government to consider entering a nolle prosequi in the case. 

The Chiefs of Assin North and minority in Parliament have virtually repeated the same thing “the members of the legal profession with considerable standing” had said. They also expressed solidarity with the Dormaahene, President of the Bono Regional House of Chiefs and Paramount Chief of Dormaa Traditional Area, Osagyefo Oseadeeyo Agyemenag Badu II who in his capacity as a traditional ruler had made a similar earlier appeal.

The people of Ghana are consequently waiting with bated breath to see the Government and the Attorney- General implementing the Attorney-General’s threats and intimidations of citizens by 

persecuting the Assin North Chiefs and the minority in parliament for the exercise of their right to free speech, assembly, and movement under the Constitution. 

Mr. Godfred Dame, the Attorney-General should always remember that no condition is permanent and that the Chiefs and people he is threatening and intimidating now are the very people he met on his way up and would meet on his way down when he ceases to be the Attorney-General.

As a protégé of Nana Akufo-Addo whom he trained from his law firm of Akufo-Addo, Prempeh & Co and appointed as Attorney-General, the perceptions of his independence and impartiality in that office has to be earned by his positive conduct and not by negative perceptions or suspicions that he is being used by the President to weaponise the Office of the Attorney-General against political opponents. 

Ghana shall always endure and win with patriots defending the Constitution no matter what Governments do. The words of William Shakespeare in Macbeth ought to be a reminder to every Government and continue to serve as a warning to all tyrants and would-be tyrants: 

“….But in these cases, 

We still have judgement here; that we but teach 

Bloody instructions, which, being taught, return 

To plague the inventor; this even-handed justice 

Commends the ingredients of our poisn’d chalice 

To our own lips….” 

Patriots, lets continue to defend the Constitution for, Freedom and Justice shall prevail in the end. Salutations to all patriotic citizens! 

Martin A. B. K. Amidu 
July 5, 2023 

The distinguished and eminent Chief of the Dormaa is lucky that the communicators attacked only his personality on air and their superiors have seen the danger it poses for the NPP in the 2024 elections.

In my case, Nana Akufo-Addo’s undercover operatives and agents were unleashed on my residence at the dawn of yesterday, Monday 3 July 2023 at 2:15 am for saying the same thing and defending persons whose constitutional rights to personal liberty are being trampled upon by their surrogates.

I have lived under threats of assassination, armed robbery, and the burning of my house, from
this regime since 16 November 2020. The late Victor Newman aborted the discussions to assassinate me then. These threats intensify any time I exercise my right to defend the Constitution just as I did recently on 28 June 2023 and 30 June 2023 resulting in a covert attack on my residence at 2:15 am, dawn yesterday, Monday 3 July 2023.

As I said in November 2020, the President, Nana Akufo-Addo is ultimately responsible for anything violent that befalls me or my residence. I shall not backdown from defending the 1992 Constitution as I am enjoined to do as a citizen of Ghana. No Ghanaian patriot must be cowed by the threats of those violating the Constitution.

According to Mr Amidu, the current prosecutor lacks understanding with regards to the duties and responsibilities of his office.

According to him, the “OSP was not established as a corporate fisheries entity to go into the oceans, rivers, and other water bodies of crime, casting its net widely to scoop in every fish the net can catch, and then decide which type of fish meets its fancy to be retained as game or food for sacrifice to the gods of persecution and which to release back into the oceans.”

His comment follows the arrest and subsequent bailing of former Environment Minister, Fimpong-Boateng.

Prof Frimpong-Boateng was invited by the OSP on May 16 as “a person necessary for the investigations into suspected corruption and corruption-related offences in respect of the activities and expenditure of the dissolved Inter-ministerial Committee on illegal mining, IMCIM.”

Although this action by Mr. Agyebeng has been widely criticised especially by the minority NDC, the former has defended the arrest, insisting that the former Chairman of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Illegal Mining (IMCIM), Prof Frimpong-Boateng is not the only person being investigated and neither is he the only government appointee who has been invited.

He argued that he has a charge to keep.

“I respect the credentials of the Professor, and I doff my hat to him. You know me very personally, I am an academician as well, and so I respect such people on all scores. I mean the CV is unbelievable, I respect that, and I applaud him for that, but I have a charge to keep. The charge I have to keep is to the Republic of Ghana and to the public. I have been put in this office to investigate corruption and corruption-related offences, to recover assets for the country.”

But rubbishing this defense, the citizen vigilante said, the “deficiencies in the investigatory and prosecutorial experience of Mr. Kissi Agyebeng is what has haunted him into overdrive to think that he can earn the trust of Ghanaians by appearing to talk tough and threatening to investigate and prosecute “everyone and every person” on mere suspicion of the commission of a corruption offence without first establishing reasonable grounds for such suspicion as though he was on a fishing expedition.”

In Mr Amidu’s write-up sighted by JoyNews, he explained that, “the ethics governing professional investigators as well as prosecutors do not permit such specialized public officers to intimidate and frighten citizens with threats of arrest and prosecution for the generic offence of corruption and corruption-related offences created under the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959) without indicating to a suspect the specified crime(s) committed or about to be committed within the generic corruption offences.

Again, “There is no crime under Act 959 known as “alleged or suspected corruption and corruption[1]related offences”. The mandate of the OSP is to “investigate and prosecute specific cases of alleged or suspected corruption and corruption-related offences” (Emphasis supplied). The specific cases of offences the OSP is enjoined to investigate and prosecute are defined under Section 79 of Act 959. Consequently, the citizen is entitled to know from the invitation letter or at the point of arrest the specific offence of alleged or specified suspected corruption and corruption-related offences for which he is reasonably suspected of having violated. The Ghana Police Service which hitherto was responsible for investigating all criminal offences under the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29), is not permitted to invite or arrest a citizen for the commission of crime generally without specifying the particular crime or offence for which the citizen is reasonably suspected of commission or about to commit,” Mr. Amidu added.

In his view, “The fundamental rights and freedoms of the citizen to fair and impartial investigation and prosecution upon reasonable suspicion of the commission of crime are guaranteed under the Constitution and the Special Prosecutor cannot decide at his whim when and how the guaranteed rights may be enjoyed by the citizen on account of the mandate of his office to investigate and prosecute specified cases of alleged or suspected corruption.”

Find the full write-up by Martin Amidu below:

The choice of Mrs. Justice Gertrude Araba Esaaba Torkornoo (Nee G. A. E. Sackey, enrolled on the Roll of Lawyers in Ghana as No.2086 on 2 October 1987) was purposeful and in line with Nana Akufo-Addo’s long game. It is the third of the last three games he has to play in the hope that nature will support his machinations to impose his will on the letter as distinct from the spirit of the 1992 Constitution at the 2024 general elections.

Mrs. Justice Gertrude Torkornoo meets the statutory qualification to be nominated as Chief Justice even if she is not the most senior or erudite by output of celebrated judgments of the Supreme Court. But she also meets other extra-judicial requirements that makes Nana Akufo-Addo to have the confidence that she is a suitable choice for actualizing his political long game.

She is supposed to be the niece of the late Major (Rtd.) Sam Acquah who was gruesomely murdered and martyred in 1982 during the PNDC regime. She hails from Winneba but was born and brought up in Cape Coast where most people from the Central Region in her parents’ peer group called home in the past. Her parents were teachers with her father Abraham Kofi Saah Sackey rising to become a Director of Education.

Professor Mills saw her as his daughter from Cape Coast by virtue of her parents and elevated her to the Court of Appeal in October 2012 after her appointment to the High Court by John Agyekum Kufour in May 2004. The minority in Parliament will, therefore, be hard put not to approve her nomination when it is tabled in Parliament on or after 2 May 2023, following the rubber stamp Council of State’s endorsement. 

The nomination of a person from the Central Region for the position of Chief Justices also creates a basis to urge the delegates to the New Patriotic Party (NPP) presidential election primaries on 4 November 2023 not to cast their votes for the feared and not dependable Kennedy Agyapong from the same region.

Nana Akufo-Addo’s calculating mentality is to eliminate a feared and threatening contender from the Central Region with a high potential of winning the presidential primaries election. This permutation also takes care of presidential contenders from the Western Regions who are lumped together with the Central Region and perceived as Fantis. That leaves the field for the about four presidential contenders hailing from the Ashanti Region to split their votes, and to beef up the chances of Nana Addo’s preferred choice, Vice-President Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, from the generic North.

Nana Akufo-Addo’s long game was borne out of an agenda he conceived after his narrow defeat at the 2008 presidential elections with Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia as his running mate, and the lack of a long game by Mr. J. A. Kufour to have ensured a victorious outcome at all costs. Never again must that happen under Nana Akufo-Addo’s watch as President of Ghana. Mr. J. A. Kufour exhibited better traits of a constitutionalist and democrat during his tenure as President.

Nana Akufo-Addo is, on the other hand, by any description an autocrat who works with the letter of the Constitution while subverting its spirit and core structural principles or doctrines. He believes in the politics of Africa being the politics of ethnic arithmetic, as Mr. Kofi Drah taught second-year political science students who had to read the compulsory subject of “Contemporary African Political Systems”.

The present composition of the Supreme Court favoured the choice of Mrs. Justice Gertrude Torkornoo as the preferred ethnic arithmetical choice for the position of Chief Justice. The departing Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Kwasi Anin-Yeboah was chosen for his Ashanti ethnicity to aid the votes in the Ashanti Region for the 2020 presidential elections. Mr. Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, the most senior Justice on the Supreme Court (after Mr. Justice Jones Dotse who retires in June 2023) hails from the Ashanti Region as Justice Anin-Yeboah, in addition to his 2013 vote with the majority in that year’s election petition: then the NDC politics of his siblings. Mr. Justice Gabriel Pwamang does not fit the ethnic equation of the long game.

Two other senior Justices of the Supreme Court from the Greater Accra Region are also soon retiring. Amongst the 17 December 2019 appointed group, the most senior is Mrs. Justice Mariam Owusu, an Ashanti like the departing Chief Justice. She is followed by Ms. Justice Avril Lovelace-Johnson (Mrs. Anin-Yeboah, regrettably the former wife of the retiring Chief Justice) from the Central Region enrolled with number 2052 on 2 October 1987, as Mrs. Justice Torkornoo whose enrollment number is 2086.

The next in seniority is Mrs. Justice Gertrude Torkornoo also from the Central Region with the added pedigree of being the late Major (Rtd.) Sam Acquah’s niece. Mrs. Justice Joy Henrietta Mensa-Bonsu of the 22 May 2020 appointed group who was enrolled in 1982 is also an Ashanti. Mr. Justice Tanko Amadu and Mr. Justice Yonny Kulendi did not also fit the ethnic equation for the long game.

The media hype that had gone on about Mr. Justice Kulendi as the potential nominee from the point of view of serious intelligence analysis was just a usual Akufo-Addo diversionary orchestration to engage the citizens’ attention for purposes of propaganda and entertainment. The arguments against Kennedy Agyapong’s election at the 4 November 2023 NPP presidential primaries which Nana Addo has generated by his nomination of a new Chief Justice would have been used against his preferred candidate, Mahamudu Bawumia, if Mr. Justice Kulendi were the nominee Chief Justice.

The wrenches thrown into the media announcement of Mrs. Justice Torkornoo as the nominated Chief Justice by Kwaku Baako, and Paul Adom-Otchere’s insinuation of a very important supreme court judge who was Alistair Mathias’s lawyer in the Gold Mafia Al Jazeera documentary both published on 18 April 2023 contained coded signals against Mr. Justice Kulendi as a preferred choice for Chief Justice.

Nana Akufo-Addo is a fixer who exploits the vulnerabilities of the Ghanaian political elite from all sides of the political divides and the intimidated mass of citizens. He fixed the approval of his Ministers in 2021 in such a manner that the Functional Executive Committee (FEC) of the NDC caved in with orders to its Members of Parliament to support the approval of his cousin Ken Ofori-Atta and others for appointment as Ministers in his Government.

He fixed the 2021 Budget Statement rejection by the minority and the E-Levy Bill controversy after the Speaker and the minority swore their fidelity to suffering Ghanaians and the Constitution by whipping the Speaker and the minority into line. He fixed the motion of censure against his cousin the Minister of Finance after the Speaker’s first clear and unambiguous statement of the road map on the procedure to be adopted under the Standing Orders and the Constitution.

He fixed the uproar amongst some of his NPP Members of Parliament who demanded that his cousin Ken Ofori-Atta, the Minister for Finance, must go on grounds of the economic hardship he brought unto the suffering mass of Ghanaians. He fixed the recent nomination and approval of Ministers for appointment in such a way that a sizeable group of NDC Members of Parliament refused to obey their whip in order to enjoy a joyous Easter vacation. Consequently, when I read that Parliament had been summoned to convene on 2 May 2023 for urgent business I had no doubt that this was another fix by Nana Akufo-Addo for the prime business of formally laying before Parliament the President’s request for the approval of the new Chief Justice under the smokescreen of urgent business.

The new Chief Justice has to be vetted and approved before 24 May 2023 and one could not be deceived about the most urgent business for which parliament is being recalled. But many Ghanaians bought into the minority leader’s claim that parliament is being recalled for the approval of loans. The public cannot be blamed for swallowing the grand deception with the choreographed plan that ensured that the formal request to the Council of Stated for rubber stamping would be made on 25 April 2023. The above exposition could change the plan.

Nature has its own way of doing justice to humanity. In other words, “man proposes and god disposes!” Nana Akufo-Addo, an ordinary mortal like all of us cannot guarantee what the future must be despite his self-perceived dexterity and skills in fixing things through the abuse of the constitutional powers put at his disposal by the electorate. This reminds me of what President Dwight D. Eisenhower said about his appointment of Chief Justice Earl Warren, who discomfited him with the Brown v Board of Education ruling ordering desegregation in public schools and other liberal opinions.

President Eisenhower said of his appointment of Chief Justice Earl Warren: “The biggest damn fool mistake I ever made.” President Harry S. Truman was even more scathing about Justice Tom C. Clark, his appointee who voted against his 1952 seizure of the steel industry to avert a strike. I am sure that when nature’s justice struck, Nana Akufo-Addo regretted appointing me as the Special Prosecutor for the Office of the Special Prosecutor. Nature may in the future ensure that the new Chief Justice lives up to the letter and the spirit of the 1992 Constitution and not who nominated her for appointment.

Be that as it may, the next stop in Nana Akufo-Addo’s long game is unfolding in the nature of the level playing field being deployed especially for the contestants for the NPP’s presidential primaries to take place on 4 November 2023 which appears to be informed by the outcome of Nana Addo’s preceding long game and covert influence peddling in favour of his preferred candidate. The NPP presidential primaries on 4 November 2023 will be the make or break point for the measurement of the success or failure of the energy and resources invested by Nana Addo in his long game for the 7 December 2024 elections.

In the affairs of humanity, nature helps those who help themselves. This is no different from the saying that: “God helps those who help themselves”. The 1992 Constitution guarantees Ghanaians all the rights and freedoms under it, not excluding those not specifically mentioned which are considered to be inherent in a democracy and intended to secure the freedom and dignity of man.

There are no fundamental rights and freedoms more important than free and fair political party primaries for intra-party contestants, and the national Parliamentary and Presidential elections. Citizens can only ensure the enjoyment of these fundamental rights and freedoms when they are vigilant and police long games intended to subvert the right and freedom of the electorate at both internal political party, and national elections. This is the only way to defend the 1992 Constitution and put Ghana First.                     

The argument that Nana Addo could not have been Mathias’ lawyer when the president himself does not remember whether he was Mathias’ lawyer is spurious and diversionary.

Nana Addo is an admitted friend of the alleged kingpin gold smuggler and money launderer for gold deals.

Period! Befriending a criminal gang member and/or financial architect is typical of the previous conduct of the President of Ghana.  

President Akufo-Addo’s response to Al Jazeera when it sought his comments about a statement made by Alistair Mathias, a Canadian, described as a financial architect that the Ghanaian president is Alistair Mathias’ good friend – in fact was his lawyer, was reported by Al Jazeera as follows: “President Akufo-Addo of Ghana told us that he had no recollection of acting as a lawyer for Alistair Mathias or his company.” Episode 4 of the Al Jazeera “Gold Mafia” documentary is a must-watch on: full episode 4 gold mafia aljazeera – YouTube   

Nana Akufo-Addo knows that to use the idiom “have no recollection” means to “remember nothing”. Nana Akufo-Addo’s reported response convinces me that Alistair Mathias was speaking the truth at the meeting with the undercover investigators from Al Jazeera who posed as Chinese businessmen. Firstly, and very importantly, Nana Akufo-Addo does not deny Alistair Mathias’ assertion that Nana Addo is his good friend. Nana Addo merely uses the idiom, “have no recollection” in relation to being his lawyer. Secondly, an astute and experienced lawyer like Nana Akufo-Addo knows the difference between “I never acted as a lawyer for Alistair Mathias or his company”, and “I have no recollection of acting as a lawyer for Alistair Mathias or his company’ which is tantamount to pleading amnesia.

In spite of the astute and experienced Nana Akufo-Addo’s response as reported by Al Jazeera without mentioning the name of the company, a less astute, inexperienced younger lawyer, and underling claiming to be counsel for President Akufo-Addo, Kow Essuman, tweeted that:

“The President has not been in private practice since 2000, neither has the President nor his law firm, Akufo-Addo, Prempeh and Co, acted as a lawyer for this Alistair Mathias or Guldrest. The President does not know this Mathias or Guldrest. Ignore the spurious allegations.”

What was the necessity for an employee of the Jubilee House, the seat of Nana Akufo-Addo’s Government of cronies, family, and friends to contradict what the President, who is the principal actor in this drama, told Al Jazeera. Curiously, the tweet was not directed at Al Jazeera but to the Ghanaian public to divert attention from the implication of Alistair Mathias’ statement within the context of the Al Jazeera investigation into Southern Africa’s biggest gold and money laundering operations, otherwise known as Al Jazeera’s Gold Mafia investigation.

Jubilee House’s assigned Goebbel, Paul Adom-Otchere, at the Metro TV’s Good Evening Ghana programme on Tuesday, 18 April 2023 also attempted to refute Alistair Mathias’ undisputed claim that the Ghanaian president was his lawyer during an editorial on his programme. Paul Adom-Otchere, a public officer Chairing the Ghana Airport Company Limited as an employee of Jubilee House naively uses the age of Alistair Mathias as proof that it is not true that Akufo-Addo was his lawyer as he would have been a teenager: “The last time Akufo-Addo was a lawyer for anybody was the year, 2000…”

Paul Adom-Otchere, without adducing any evidence parrots that: “… in 2001 Akufo-Addo became attorney general, from there foreign minister, from there opposition leader… He didn’t do law, he didn’t go to court, he never went to his law firm, Akufo-Addo and Prempeh, and the law firm didn’t represent him.” I do not know who told Paul Adom-Otchere that an opposition leader cannot practice law or that going to court is what makes a person a practicing lawyer.

Above all, Paul Adom-Otchere does not produce proof that Nana Akufo-Addo ceased to be a partner in his law firm, Akufo-Addo, Prempeh & Co when he ceased to be the Minister for Foreign Affairs up to 7 January 2017 when he took the oath of office as President of Ghana.

Surely, Alistair Mathias was not also a teenager when Nana Addo became his good friend or how does Paul Adom-Otchere explain that undenied fact by the President to Ghanaians?    

The poorly trained Goebbel of the Jubilee House at Metro TV cowardly and inexcusably refuses to name the supreme court judge he claims was Alistair Mathias’ lawyer in 2014 in a criminal case brought by one Henry Osei against Alistair Mathias for suspected fraud.

Justice Clarence Thomas, the oldest Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court is making the news for suspected criminal conduct and there should be no different yardstick for Ghana as a constitutional democracy.

Paul Adom-Otchere naively forgets that by the disclosures he made he was letting the cat out of the bag about Nana Addo’s friendship with Alistair Mathias should it turn out that the Supreme Court judge is Nana Addo’s protégée at the Supreme Court, whom the president praised himself on 10 December 2021 as reported by 3news.com. The 3news.com report quoted Nana Addo as follows:

“I must have been doing something right in my other life. When I see today, the two of my protégés, Yonny Kulendi and Godfred Dame both members of Akufo Addo, Prempeh & Co are occupying two important and sensitive positions in our state, Justice of the Supreme Court and Attorney General. …I wish them well and I have every confidence that they will discharge their offices with credit.”

Or is Paul Adom-Octchere perusing another agenda against Supreme Court Justice Emmanuel Yonny Kulendi? With Paul Adom-Otchere’s hint I researched the allegation he raised against the judge without a name and I came upon two links that led me to the possible person on the Supreme Court Adom-Otchere was referring to.

The reader can read them on Alistair Jude Mathias is at large | News Ghana and http://myinfo.com.gh/2021/04/herald-responds-to-lawyer-adjei-dwomohs-frivolous-case-at-nmc/ . 

The second reportage names the judge specifically. Dennis Adjei-Dwomoh is currently a member of the National Investment Board (NIB) appointed by this Government.

But to act as a lawyer for any suspected criminal is not a criminal conduct on the part of the lawyer. Every suspect is entitled under the Constitution to a good defence. That is why hiding the name is pernicious.

The President stated on 10 December 2021 that Yonny Kulendi and Godfred Dame, both former members of Akufo Addo, Prempeh & Co, were his protégées.

Mr Godfred Dame was enrolled on the Roll of Lawyers in Ghana in 2003. This is inconsistent with the argument that: “The President has not been in private practice since 2000….” as contended by Mr. Essuman and Mr. Adom-Otchere.

How did Mr. Dame become the President’s protégée if he had nothing to do with Akufo-Addo, Prempeh & Co as a law partner? The public needs an explanation.

President Akufo-Addo could have introduced Alistair Mathias as a friend to one of his numerous protégées whom he groomed in Akufo-Addo, Prempeh & Co after listening to the legal problems of his friend.

The protégée need not to be still working at Akufo-Addo, Prempeh & Co. It is all a matter of confidence and trust as he exhibited to his two protégées by elevating them as the President by their appointments.

The layman would consider the referral by such an astute and experienced lawyer of his legal matters to his protegees as the senior lawyer holding himself out as a practicing lawyer and will naturally describe the more senior lawyer as his lawyer.

Normally, when things do not go on well with the manner the protegee handles the case, the friend returns to the astute and experienced one to complain.

Holding oneself out as a practicing lawyer and referring a good friend to another lawyer is as good as being in private practice as a lawyer. Alistair Mathias cannot, therefore, be faulted if he understood his relationship with Nana Addo as one of lawyer and client.

The 1 hour 12 minutes 36 seconds of the Episode 4 of the Al Jazeera documentary on the Gold Mafia in Southern Africa is very damning of the numerous African Presidents and their modus operandi.

One can, therefore, understand the disquiet amongst Nana Addo’s underlings in his not too elegant response to Al Jazeera’s request for his comments on what Alistair Mathias said about him.

But who in Ghana does not know that Nana Akufo-Addo has associated with suspected criminal gang members before and after he assumed office as President?

The younger generation might not have heard of the likes of Raymond Kwame Amankwah who was alleged to have attended the victory celebration of the 2020 election in Accra only to return to his base in Mozambique to die of COVID-19 said to have been contracted at the victory party in Ghana.

The fact that Nana Addo has been a friend to Ernesto Taricone and his Ghanaian family members is an open secret and explains why Alfred Woyome, the financial engineer, alone had his assets sold in satisfaction of the Supreme Court judgment in the Waterville case by this Government.

One of the lawyers who assisted Ernesto Taricone to register Waterville in the British Virgin Island is a known friend of Nana Addo and was suspected as being instrumental in the scandalous Agyapa Royalties Limited registered in the Island of Jersey.

Prof.  Kwabena Frimpong-Boateng’s IMCIM Galamsey Report of 2021 is also a trending topic. Now, we know that Alistair Mathias the alleged gold smuggling and money laundering financial architect is at least Nana Addo’s good friend, to mention but a few examples.

Mr Mathias could be the financial architect behind Agyapa and Gold-for-Oil.

And this is the Father or should I say, the Mother, of the nation who took the constitutional oath to ensure the nourishment of We the People of Ghana and to protect us from economic hardships and sufferings.

But he instead has led the nation into the insolvency and economic mess we are witnessing for the first time in our live time as a nation.

The Constitution demands that the Government be accountable and transparent to Ghanaians with allegations made against the President.

Patriots are enjoined by the Constitution not to allow the Government to deceive the public as I have done in this discourse. Ghana First!

Martin A. B. K. Amidu
24 April 2023        

“I state in conclusion, that whereas all the statements founded on exhibits KOA1, KOA2, KOA3 and KOA4 were truthful and factual, thereby sustaining defendant’s defence of justification and fair comment, the statements in plaintiff’s exhibit C; though capable of defamatory meanings, were not proven to have actually defamed the plaintiff. I found the claims of plaintiff merit-less. It is hereby dismissed.”

ANAS A. ANAS AS THE PLAINTIFF

 Anas A. Anas the Plaintiff dabbles both as a lawyer and an “internationally acclaimed investigative journalist”. Anas A. Anas knowingly and voluntarily caused his action to be commenced by one Listowell Bukarson on behalf of Anas A. Anas as the plaintiff. This was by virtue of a power of attorney authorizing him to bring the action in the name of the plaintiff, Anas A. Anas on 18 June 2018 for twenty-five million Ghana cedis (GHS25million) damages. The writ of summons was amended on 20 November 2018 after the defendant had filed his statement of defence on 13 November 2018. The Plaintiff then replied on 21 January 2019 to close the pleadings. The filing of the action through an attorney as an agent of a principal is not controversial and is enabled by law.

Any act in any court required or authorized by the law to be made or done by a party in such court may be done by an authorized agent. The question is whether the attorney can testify on behalf of the plaintiff on matters which are not within his personal knowledge. Did the attorney see or witness the transactions alleged? As far as the requirement that he should testify about what he actually did see or heard is concerned, the attorney could not testify about what the plaintiff himself witnessed or heard.

The rule against admissibility of hearsay evidence is statutory. Anas A. Anas, the plaintiff put himself in a situation of being incapable of giving relevant and primary evidence in person and be cross-examined because he lives in the fear of his own shadow as an anti-corruption entrepreneur and not as a genuine anti-corruption crusader. Anas A. Anas thus lost the only opportunity to publicly tell the court his version of the facts within his personal knowledge and to be cross-examined to establish his credibility. Genuine anti-corruption crusaders do not hide their faces behind masks.

READING AND EVALUATING THE JUDGMENT

I have painstakingly read and re-read the 64-page judgment of the trial High Court in ANAS v AGYEPONG using all the knowledge, experience, and arsenals in the legal armory I have acquired over the past upwards of four and half decades (45 years) when I held myself out as a private legal practitioner, a public officer serving in various capacities, including Deputy Attorney General, Minister of the Interior, and Attorney General, amongst others. I declined for personal reasons my proposed elevation as a justice to the Supreme Court in 1999. I am now retired and hold no licence to practice law.

But I say that while one may disagree with the judgment or aspects of the judgment of the learned trial judge in the case, no rational person learned in the law can fault the trial judge for the transparent and accountable manner he went about stating the facts, the issues, the burden of proof and other methodological procedure that enabled him to arrive at his evaluation of the evidence and the conclusions upon his appreciation and understanding of the evidence that unfolded before him at the trial. I make these statements based solely upon the content of the judgment which I downloaded from open source when the media published it. I read the judgment without any previous bank of knowledge about Mr. Justice Eric Baah, JA, sitting as an additional High Court Judge. I have never known or remember ever meeting him, and to the best of my recollection it was the first time I was hearing about him or reading a judgment authored by him. In my candid view after reading the judgment over and over again, I was left in no doubt that the learned trial judge had performed his judicial duty as a trial judge would do based on his appreciation of the evidence before him and the law as he elucidated and understood it. The trial judge exhibited a consciousness of the fact that generally in a civil trial, the burden of proof is on the preponderance of probabilities.

The judge underscored the evidential requirement that where, however, a criminal act is the issue in a civil trial, the burden of persuasion requires proof beyond reasonable doubt, though the sufficiency of the evidence required to attain that standard would depend, to a large extent, on the gravity of that particular offence. The trial judge also exhibited a consciousness of the fact that he was not sitting as a criminal trial court trying crimes but as a civil court trying a case of defamation which had in issue allegations of criminal act(s). The trial judge through the thoroughness of his analysis and legal reasoning demonstrated in his judgment that he was not convicting any of the parties to the action of any criminal offence or having the power to sentence any of them.

The judge reminded himself of his duty to evaluate the evidence, the facts, the law and make findings on the balance of probabilities whether the plaintiff had made out a case of defamation or had failed to do so as a result of the defence put forward by the defendant. In performing his duty as a trial civil court for the tortious offence of defamation he made findings that there was on the balance of probabilities forgery, blackmailing, bribery and corruption, an alleged murder, etcetera, justifiably made by the defendant against the plaintiff. But these findings did not constitute criminal convictions for which the losing party may be sentenced to jail. A trial court or appellate court commits no offence in making such findings and giving judgment based upon those findings in civil trials and civil appeals.

The rules of evidence make it clear in Ghana that in civil trials the availability of a judgment convicting a person for a crime at a criminal trial does not even relieve the civil trial judge from satisfying himself on the evidential burden in the civil trial where a criminal act is in issue. Section 127(1) of Ghana’s Evidence Decree, 1975 (Act 323) and the accompanying Commentary throws light on this matter.

POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT AND COHORT SCANDALIZATION OF THE COURT

After reading the judgement of the trial court several times, I decided to research how the judgment was perceived in the politicized environment of Ghana of today where even truth is turned on its head by paid political communicators, partisan political elites, and politicians seeking raw political power with no iota of the basic democratic morality or values premised on the interest of the ordinary citizen.

Anas A. Anas’s Action and Reaction to Judgment

Anas A. Anas was not compelled by the judiciary to bring an action for defamation before any level of the court system against Kennedy Agyepong. He consciously and voluntarily chose to do so in the expectation that he may prevail at the trial. Any party losing in the trial court has a right of appeal if he formed the view that there were appealable grounds against the decision of the trial court. The right of appeal is exercisable by both parties up to the Supreme Court provided they guide against abusing the process of the court with spurious actions and appeals. But a losing party or his cohorts who impute partiality or impropriety to the judge or court commit the offence of scandalizing the trial judge, the court, and the administration of justice as an institution and are in contempt of Court whether or not the losing party subsequently files an appeal against the judgment.

The decision of Supreme Court in the case of REPUBLIC v MENSA-BONSU & OTHERS, EX PARTE ATTORNEY-GENERAL [1995- 96] 1 GLR 377 governs the situation.

Anas A. Anas, a lawyer, and the founding partner in Cromwell Gray LLP with William Agyebeng, now the Special Prosecutor, and his cohorts appeared to assume that when a trial goes against one’s expectations, the trial judge must be vilified and attacked as an excuse for filing an appeal.

The plaintiff was reported to have said, amongst other things, about the judgment that went against him that:

“My team of lawyers and I have carefully studied the judgement delivered by the court and we are unanimous that the judge made an overreach and descended into the arena and made a criminal pronouncement about me as if I was standing a criminal trial.”

The civil action for defamation which Anas A. Anas voluntarily brought before the trial court involved criminal acts which were the issue in a civil trial and the trial judge was bound to make determinations on them in the civil trial. How could the trial judge do that without using the rules of evidence on the burden of proof which any trial court is bound to consider in making its findings on the evidence?

The impression that by performing his judicial functions in exercise of the judicial power guaranteed under the 1992 Constitution the trial judge had descended into the arena of conflict is an attack on the independence and impartiality of the judge and constitutes a scurrilous abuse of the court.

One who has confidence in his cause will quietly go on appeal without making any political fussy to save face.

Reaction from the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) & The Fourth Estate

On the same day, another investigative journalist who has received the Anas Aremeyaw Anas investigative journalist award from the Press Foundation and is associated or works under a project of the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA), heaped scandalous abuse on the trial judge, the court, and the judiciary as an institution. He was quoted to have said, inter alia, that:

“The judge said what Anas does is “investigative terrorism” and not investigative journalism. Having gone through the judgment, however, one won’t be an inch away from the truth to conclude that what happened is judicial terrorism.” The Executive Director of the MFWA in an interview on JoyNews’ Newsfile on Saturday, 18 March 2021 (who works with the journalist who scandalized the trial judge, court and the judiciary as engaged in “judicial terrorism”) was reported to have used words disparaging and constituting scurrilous abuse of the court and the judiciary as an institution. He was quoted on open source as saying that: ‘the Judges’ decision “went beyond probing whether what Kennedy Agyapong said was true, or not true, justifiable, fair and whatever, to actually himself defaming the character of Anas.”’

It is an abuse of the independence guaranteed the media under the 1992 Constitution to accuse a judge sitting as a judge in exercise of his judicial functions and powers of defaming the character of a plaintiff who voluntarily submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court and gave evidence to the court through an agent-attorney.

The imputation of partiality and impropriety to the court, the administration of justice, and the trial judge’s character constitutes contempt of scandalizing the judge and the administration of justice. As Mrs. Justice A. Dordzie, J (as she then was) decided in the REPUBLIC v GENERAL PORTFOLIO & 3 OTHERS, Suit No. MISC. 932/96, High Court, Accra, 9 August 1996 (Unreported), the slightest suggestion of bias will be contempt and thus the defence of fair comment is not recognized in contempt scandalizing the court. It is the last thing one would have expected from the MFWA.

CDD-Ghana’s Endorsement of Subterfuge and other pending matters

On the same JoyNews’ Newsfile on Saturday, 18 March 2023, Dr. Pumpuni Asante of CDDGhana was reportedly quoted to have said that there are many cases that demand that the investigators resort to deception in order to bring the issue to the attention of the public for thorough investigations to be conducted in order to punish the perpetrators.

Dr Asante is reported to have justified the unethical use of subterfuge by the executive branch, and private and unlicensed covert investigators in the following words:

“… there are many issues around corruption that you have to use subterfuge to get to the matter. … And often when it happens, it will lead to an investigation—a substantive investigation—like in the FIFA case, it led to a substantive investigation and then it helps society to address these problems in society,”

Dr. Pumpuni Asante’s disdain for investigatory and prosecutorial ethics which is the foundation of constitutionalism, democracy and the rule of law that upholds the dignity of the citizen from covert state and private unlicensed investigatory overreach for the preservation of the right to be presumed innocent and the right against self-incrimination only confirms my earlier conclusions about what I referred to in my article, “The Fight Against Corruption Requires A High Degree of Crusading Integrity And Not Entrepreneurship” of 16 September 2022 on the supposed doyen of the NGO’s, CDD-Ghana.

CDD-Ghana is the supposed doyen of the entrepreneurial NGOs in Ghana because as reported in a Modern Ghana article, “Corruption Watch Ghana is an initiative by the Ghana Center for Democratic Development (CDD-Ghana) and a coalition of anti-corruption civil society organizations including, Ghana Integrity Initiative (GII), Ghana Anti- Corruption Coalition (GACC), and Africa Center for International Law and Accountability (ACILA)…” I came to the considered conclusion in my article of 16 September 2022 on the high degree of crusading integrity required to fight corruption and not entrepreneurship that:

“The same influence peddling or trading of influence can be seen on the website of the OSP where two of the leading foreign influenced NGOs have become integral partners of an independent OSP: Afrobarometer-Center for Democracy and Development (CDD), and Ghana Integrity Initiative (GII) – without the slightest shame of any conflict of interest in rigging the elections to Chairpersonship of the governing council of the OSP and violating Section 22 of Act 959 which forbids the OSP from accepting any funds directly or indirectly from anybody except from or through the Ministry of Finance.

This partnership clearly negates the independence of the OSP and now enhances the ability of the NGOs to use influence peddling or trading of influence to source funds, grants and donations from foreign sources first to meet their administrative expenses and salaries, and secondly to interfere in the independent operations of the OSP.”

It is Dr. Pumpuni Asante and CDD-Ghana’s unethical approach to hallowed law enforcement and prosecutorial rules and conventions that has led him to trivialize a considered judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction in Ghana by justifying subterfuge in investigations which the trial court found as being inconsistent with the rule of law and justice in the defamation claim by the plaintiff. I am not surprised by the attitude of CDD-Ghana and its Corruption Watch Ghana initiative because one of their close associates was brave enough to confess to the Deputy Special Prosecutor and I when I was the Special Prosecutor that they had funded a journalist to undertake covert investigation of a public official.

The associate told us that, thereafter the associate negotiated with the Minister for National Security to persuade the President to refer the resultant covert investigation to the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) for further investigation and prosecution. When the Government had done the associate’s bidding, the anti-corruption coalition petitioned the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice as well. The CDDGhana had gotten the head of its close associate unto the OSP without ever stopping to think of how unethical it was to involve the OSP as an independent anti-corruption agency in a covert investigation funded by one of its minions on the OSP governing board.

The conflict of interest involved in the whole funded “subterfuge” operation by the CDDGhana’s associate tainted the independent investigatory and prosecutorial discretion of the OSP. I found it unconstitutional and unethical as a former Deputy Attorney General and Attorney General to have exercised any prosecutorial discretion in the referral by the Presidency obtained through blackmail before I resigned as the Special Prosecutor. These are the very anti-corruption civil society organizations who are the leading foreign funded and influential NGOs in Ghana now constituting integral partners of a supposedly independent OSP.

The journalist for hire or for sale who was funded for the covert operations has received multiple year after year awards from this associate of the CDD-Ghana without any disclosure of the hiring or buying fees paid to the journalist for his entrepreneurial services as an investigative journalist. The audio and video materials admitting the funding used to hire or buy the investigative journalist is available on open source for those who care to research it. The reader should only make sure he accesses the full original audios and videos of the interviews and not the subsequent edited ones also now easily available on open source.

Political reaction to the judgment at UPSA in lecture on financing political campaigns

I also found it amazing that the judgment of the trial court became an instrument of cheap politicking on 22 March 2023 at a lecture on financing political campaigns, at the UPSA auditorium.

The august Speaker, who is also a contender for one of the political party’s flagbearership position at the coming party primaries was quoted as having said that:

“God willing, in 2025, when I have the opportunity to be the President of Ghana who has been a President before, I will come with priceless experience to fix our broken nation. I want us to build the Ghana we want together by writing – not footnotes, not pages but – chapters in the anticorruption history of our dear country Ghana. We must also uphold human rights, including freedom of expression and not be describing some journalists as terrorists.” (Emphasis supplied).

The problem I have with the insertion of the above last sentence as a cheap innuendo and malicious castigation of the court and the judge in the Speaker’s speech is that Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo excelled and exhibited more sophistication in deceiving Ghanaians for their votes at the 2016 elections only to throw those values and promises to the wind as President of Ghana. My second issue was whether the former Excellency even found time to read the trial judge’s 64 -page judgment in which the judge reminded himself in Section H, at page 11 to 13 of his considered judgment on “H. Defamation and Freedom of Expression.”

As part of the trial judge’s analysis of freedom of expression versus the right to human dignity and its defence through the law of defamation, the court, amongst other things, at page 13 paragraph 2 stated that:

“The right to free speech and dignity of the individual are two competing constitutionally guaranteed values, none of which is superior to the other…In contest in this case is the defendant’s right to free speech and expression, and the plaintiff’s right to the inviolability of his dignity and reputation…The law of defamation however gives this court jurisdiction to umpire a dispute between an individual’s right to dignity, and the right to free speech and expression, as this case presents.”

I shudder to think that the august Speaker at the UPSA whose main topic had to do with financing political campaigns was just copying from Nana Akufo Addo’s 2015-2016 over flogged psychological deception play book just to attain political power. My third concern was the deceptive allegation that the trial judge tagged journalist as terrorists without reference to the context of the findings and decisions contained in the trial court’s judgment. The judgment states upon the available evidence at pages 60 to 62 of the judgment that:

‘In his evidence in chief, defendant contended that the meeting in exhibit KOA4, was to plot to entrap the Prime Minister of Ivory Coast and the President of Ghana. The conversations in exhibits KOA3 and KOA4 appear very much to confirm that claim. …As the fake Sheik stated in exhibit KOA3 “they planned it very well.”

The President and the Prime Minister who plaintiff and his team targeted are the leaders of their nations. They embody the soul and spirit of the nations. ….However, a pre-emptily, unjustified attacks on their credibility, unprovoked by any credible suspicion of a specific act of corruption engaged in or about to be engaged in by them, such as drawing them into a trap so as to be caught in a contrived corruption set up, as was alleged by the defendant, and backed by exhibits KOA4, was unwarranted and devious. It should be understood that as officers caught by plaintiff in his investigations have lost their jobs, an entrapped president may be compelled to resign out of shame or public pressure. That means, the plaintiff through his investigative antics can cause the removal of a president, and thereby upend the mandate given to him at the elections. That is not investigative journalism. It is investigative terrorism. It is exercise of indirect political power under the cloak of journalism (page 60). The serious aspect is that political, enemies of a president who could not stand him at an election, may hire the plaintiff to entrap him to undermine his presidency. Enemies of a state can also hire him just to destroy the political hierarchy.

Xxxx

In all honesty, the plot by plaintiff and his group in exhibit KOA4 has nothing to do with journalism. It was a scheme for grabbing power by the back door and satisfying plaintiff’s insatiable taste for power, publicity, fame, awards, and rewards. Since the president is an embodiment of the soul of the nation, any unwarranted plot out of nothing to entrap him to destroy his reputation and undermine his authority is reproachable.

The attacks of defendant on plaintiff on that ground deserves commendation and not condemnation (page 61). I hold in respect of exhibits KOA3 and KOA4, that any statements based on them were justified and passed the test of fair comment. In the result, the court finds established the defence of justification and fair comment in relation to the statements of defendant based on exhibits KOA1, KOA2, KOA3 and KOA4. Since those statements were justified, they could not have actually defamed the plaintiff (pages 62).’ I will rest my comments and criticism about the unwarranted political intervention by the former President without stirring further the hornets’ nest with other observations on the integrity of being an honest leader and a return of a Christ the messiah operating on my mind.

Judgment based on evaluation of Exhibits, facts and evidence permissible by law

The trial judge’s findings and conclusions are derived from the evidence as he evaluated them from “Exhibits KOA1, KOA2, KOA3 and KOA4”.

I hold no brief for his appreciation of the facts, the evidence and conclusions on the law. But he is empowered by the 1992 Constitution to perform his judicial functions and exercise the judicial power entrusted to him as a superior court judge. The appellate process is clearly provided for in the Constitution and laws of Ghana to ensure the rule of law and not the rule of public opinion for the attainment of raw abusive political power.

RESPONSIBILITY OF ANTI-CORRUPTION CRUSADERS AND POLITICAL LEADERS

I hold the view that those who aspire to genuinely crusade against corruption as investigative journalists, and to lead this nation in the exercise of the executive power ought to show an example in upholding the integrity of the judicial process instead lending their voices to the cohorts of a losing party to scandalize and bring the administration of justice into disrepute. It should also be remembered that there are abundant documentary and other evidence of who created and facilitated Anas A. Anas’s rise as an anti-corruption entrepreneur and a covert political agent with unaccountable privileges. The OSP investigated these facts during my tenure in the pending Charles Bissue corruption investigation case reported to the OSP by letter under the signature of Kissi Agyebeng, who was then Anas A. Anas’ law firm partner at Cromwell Gray LLP. Kissi Agyebeng is now the Special Prosecutor.

Anti-corruption as an endemic profitable enterprise for covert property acquisitions

The fight against corruption has become the darling child of the most corrupt members of civil society organizations who see anti-corruption as a profitable enterprise which protects and removes every suspicion from those entrepreneurs of being endemically corrupt themselves. It is easy to squander donor funds under the guise of fighting corruption without raising an eyebrow. I wish one could make an inventory of the properties acquired by some of the management of the so called entrepreneurial anti-corruption civil society organizations and compare them to the acquisitions made by some honest public officers and the honest political office holder after several years of long service to mother Ghana.

CORRUPT NON-DISCLOSURES OF BENEFICIAL INTERESTS AND CONCLUSIONS

As I went about studying, examining, and analyzing the 64-page judgment in ANAS A. ANAS v KENNEDY AGYEPONG and researching the comments against the judgment I came across the fact that some of the critics and participants in the discourse on the judgment including JoyNews’ Newsfile were recipients of the Anas Award for Best Journalist set up by The Press Foundation. The Press Foundation, from open source material, was established by Anas A. Anas’s agent and attorney in the GHS25million defamation case, Listowell Bukarson, who commenced the action on Anas’ behalf as the plaintiff.

These recipients of the Anas Award for Best Journalist have written, conducted radio and TV interviews scurrilously abusing and scandalizing the court without disclosing their interest and stake in the fortunes of Anas. A. Anas as the plaintiff or in his agent in the court who conferred the awards upon them in Kumasi and Bolgatanga through the Press Foundation. This is evidence of malicious criticism of the court and the trial judge. Presenting oneself to the public as an honest, impartial, and independent broker in maliciously criticizing the judgment of the court and scandalizing the court while being a beneficiary of an award set up in the suppose honour of the losing plaintiff is unpardonable corruption in the broadest and unethical sense.

Courting and creating a perception of goodwill and integrity from the innocent public through subterfuge is a worse form of corruption also in a broadest and immoral sense. It is professionally unethical and corrupt, whichever profession or professions one belongs to. Ghana shall rise again one day in probity, transparency, and accountability under the 1992 Constitution.

–

Martin A. B. K. Amidu

29 March 2023

According to the said documents, only the Deputy Special Prosecutor has been paid; leaving other staff of the office agitated. The documents further disclosed that the former Special Prosecutor, Martin Amidu is owed salary arrears.

 My name has been mentioned in respect of the supposed salary arrears. I accordingly invoke my right to a rejoinder under Article 162(6) of the Constitution.

I agreed to the request by the President to be the Special Prosecutor (SP) not for the purpose of the salary and/or benefits attached to the Office but for the patriotic duty of fighting corruption which I had been undertaking at personal expense before my appointment.

Consequently, I wish to state that I know how to fight my own cause and I do not need anybody to do so on my behalf. 

The Special Prosecutor holds a warrant of appointment from the President and is at liberty to pick up whatever method and fights he wishes with his appointing authority for himself and on behalf of his friends and cronies who do not hold any warrant of appointment under Section 21 of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959) and Article 195(1) of the 1992 Constitution. 

My information is that the SP has not been paid because he is asking for a higher personalised salary than that offered him.

I do not want to be part of the SP’s discourse on his salary and my relationship to any salaries when I served. 

Whosoever provided documents to Joy News should have included my petition dated 31 August 2022 to the Chairman of the Public Services Commission on the unconstitutional appointment of permanent staff to the Office of the Special Prosecutor contrary to Section 21 of Act 959 and Article 195 of the 1992 Constitution.

The person who made the documents available to Joy News should also have made available to Joy News my letter dated 2nd September 2022 addressed to the Minister of Finance, the Auditor-General, the Accountant-General, and the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament referring to my petition and warning them of the danger of making unconstitutional disbursement from the public purse to unlawfully appointed staff of the OSP.

I copied each of my above letters to the Chairperson of the OSP, and the Special Prosecutor, amongst others. 

Joy News should have asked for the appointment warrants or letters for the so-called staff of the OSP as part of the documents available to it and it would have found that no appointment has been made by the President to the OSP in accordance with the advice of the OSP Board and in consultation with the Public Services Commission. 

All the unconstitutional appointments made by the OSP before the Board was appointed in June 2022 do not contain the salary levels of the appointees and do not state that they were appointed by the President under Section 21 of Act 959 and Article 195 of the 1992 Constitution.

Each of the letters begins as follows, with the square brackets showing a variation of type,” Offer of Appointment as ……We are pleased to offer you appointment…with effect from …2022 on the following terms and conditions: (i) to x [or] xi”. Please return the duplicate of this letter on or before …2022 duly signed and dated as acceptance of the offer of appointment and terms of appointment.

ALSO READ:

Special Prosecutor yet to receive salary 10 months in office

Martin Amidu has finished Akufo-Addo – Victor Smith [Video]

“I extend a warm welcome to you and wish you all the best for a successful career. [I wish you all the best for a successful career.] Faithfully, (signed)….” Arbitrary and discriminatory ranks were assigned to seconded staff who were compelled to resign or retire from the Public Service, and cronies and friends were given enhanced ranks and positions in the OSP at massive cost to the public purse. 

There is no official reference number to each letter and no other person is copied to be informed about the appointment, such as the Chairman Public Services Commission, the Minister of Finance, the Auditor-General, the Accountant-General, the Chairperson of the Board, and the Presidency as is usual when persons are appointed by warrant under the authority of the President.

Not even the Chief Accountant of the OSP is copied. The Special Prosecutor signed the supposed letters of appointment, without any authority whatsoever.

How does the Government pay such workers who do not hold valid warrants of appointment? The Minister of Finance and the Accountant-General cannot authorise the payment of salaries for newly appointed staff without verifying that the persons have been properly appointed in accordance with the 1992 Constitution. 

Parliament cannot support such unconstitutionality and it is for this reason that I addressed my letter to the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament who happens to be the Deputy Minority Leader of Parliament.

He was under a duty to inform the Minority Leader which he failed to do for his own reasons. This, understandably, misled the Minority Leader into making the comments he made to Joy News on this matter. 

The OSP was established to ensure that it demonstrates integrity in the recruitment of permanent staff transparently and accountably in accordance with the provisions of Article 195 and Section 21 of Act 959.

The OSP cannot in the name of fighting corruption, corruptly and unconstitutionally recruit cronies and friends from Cromwell Gray LLP and others associates without the involvement of the Board and the Public Services Commission. 

An OSP that intends to rape the public purse massively for cronies and friends in contravention of the 1992 Constitution has gone rogue and has become itself a corrupt institution that cannot fulfil any objects and functions under Act 959.

Joy News may wish to invite the Chairperson of the OSP to contradict me on the unlawful and unconstitutional appointments made by the Special Prosecutor for which blame is deliberately and maliciously being passed on to the Government. 

I reproduce hereunder the content of my letter dated 2nd September 2022 addressed to the Minister of Finance, the Auditor-General, the Accountant-General and the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament which was copied to the Special Prosecutor and the Chairperson of the Board of the OSP. 

“2nd September 2022 

RE: THE PETITION OF MARTIN ALAMISI BURNS KAISER AMIDU (MARTIN A. B. K. AMIDU) ON THE APPOINTMENT OF PERMANENT STAFF INTO THE OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR (OSP) WITHOUT THE INVOLVEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE GOVERNING BOARD AND THE PUBLIC SERVICES COMMISSION – ARTICLE 195 AND SECTION 21 OF ACT 959 

I write this letter to each of you as a sequel to my petition to the Chairman of the Public Services Commission on the above subject matter dated 31st August 2022 and delivered to his office the same day (I attach herewith a photocopy of the said petition for your ease of reference.) 

My petition to the Chairman of the Public Services Commission necessitates this letter to you as keepers of the public purse/and or overseers of the expenditure charged on the public purse to ensure that you are well informed of the content of my petition. A constitutional and statutory duty is imposed on you to ensure that no expenditure is approved and charged upon the consolidated fund (the public purse) which is unlawful and violates Article 195 of the 1992 Constitution, the Office of the Special Prosecutor, Act, 2017, and pursuant regulations. 

Recruitments and appointments of staff made not “….acting in accordance with the advice of the governing council of the OSP and in consultation with the Public Services Commission” will be inconsistent with and in contravention of Article 195 of the Constitution and accordingly void (Emphasis supplied). The case of Ghana Bar Association & Others v Attorney-General & Others (Consolidated Writs), Supreme Court, 20th July 2016, is binding authority on this matter. The governing council cannot ratify such unconstitutional and unlawful recruitments and appointments, neither can the Public Services Commission do so. The purported appointment letters and subsequent warrants of appointments (if any) would be standing on nothing and equally void. 

It is, therefore, because of your respective gatekeeping functions of protecting the public purse that I found it expedient to write to you (for the avoidance of any doubt) to become aware of the issues raised in my petition to the Public Services Commission should you come to approve or authorise the disbursement of expenditure arising from the compensation budget of the OSP in the matters I have petitioned against to the Commission. 

Kindly accept my compliments of the highest consideration.” 

I am attaching a PDF copy of my petition dated 31 August 2022 to the Chairman of the Public Services Commission, and a PDF copy of my letter to the Minister of Finance, the Auditor-General, the Accountant-General, and the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament reproduced above as part of this rejoinder to demonstrate that the Government could not and cannot in the name of fighting corruption have paid any salary to any of the cronies and friends corruptly and unlawfully recruited and promoted by the OSP contrary to the 1992 Constitution.

The reason the OSP relied on seconded staff under my tenure is fully explained in my petition to the Chairman of the Public Services Commission. 

We do the public a great disservice when we accuse or indict the Government for not facilitating the fight against corruption when the fault lies squarely with an Office which has gone rogue under a Special Prosecutor who acts corruptly in violation of Article 195 the 1992 Constitution and Section 21 of Act 959.

It is only a corrupt OSP that will encourage the media to call the Government a bad name just to hang it when the culprit is the OSP itself. Where is integrity in the fight against corruption? Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion. 

It is a shame that the National Democratic Congress which we founded and nursed to represent the 31st December Revolutionary tradition has now been reduced to the politics of ethnic arithmetic. 

 “I’m an Akyem, and I become the national organiser of the party. Do you know what I have suffered as an Akyem person to become NDC chairman or organiser?…Today, go to Kyebi and see; my hometown is Asikam, the next town from Kyebi. Roads are constructed in Kyebi, and the construction stops just at the border of my hometown. Not even one asphalt road has been constructed in my hometown…. (Samuel) Atta Akyea (Member of Parliament for Abuakwa South) distributed streetlights and when it got to my mother’s downtown, Akyem Adukrom, they did not even get a light because they vote for the NDC.” 

 The incumbent NDC Chairman is reported to have said that his citrus plantation was burnt after the 2000 elections and he was nearly assassinated when he was running to become the Member of Parliament for the Fanteakwa Constituency in 2004. 

Mr Samuel Ofosu-Ampofo should be appreciated for his commitment and dedication to the NDC over the years but that should not be based on his ethnic origins. Other committed members of the NDC have died since 1992 for belonging to the National Democratic Congress, the latest being about eight dead in the 2020 elections. They did not die because they were Akyems or of any particular ethnic or tribal stock. There were so many Akyems who pitched their camp with the NDC or an NDC affiliate party in the Progressive Alliance since its inception such as Dr Adjei Marfo, the late Fred Ohene-Kena of Kukurantumi, the late Danny Ofori-Atta and Mr Owuraku Amofah of Ofori Panin Fie of Kyebi itself, and others, out of volition. 

My disappointment in the banal level to which the NDC Chairmanship election campaign had sunk was aggravated when it was reported that the former Eastern Regional Minister and native of Kukurantumi, Victor Smith, had said that he and other leading members of the party, including ex-President Mahama, advised Johnson Asiedu-Nketiah not to challenge Samuel Ofosu-Ampofo for the chairmanship position since it might create unnecessary tension, but he refused to listen to them. As if this was not enough side-taking by a senior member of the NDC, he added that: 

“When the General Secretary called me one evening and indicated that he wanted to contest for the party’s chairmanship position, I told him that he was going to cause trouble in the party. But the general secretary told me that he had already made up his mind…. I told him that his move would lead to people spilling out some secrets, but he did not listen. John Dramani Mahama and the party leaders advised him not to contest, but he said he had already decided and it was a democracy.” 

The message that Mr Victor Smith sought to convey by his interview apart from carrying the ethnic undertones of the messenger’s own place of ethnic origin also implicitly sought to inform the public that John Dramani Mahama does not support Mr Aseidu-Nketiah’s bid to become Chairman of the NDC in the upcoming elections. Mr Smith is simply urging Mr Mahama’s supporters to vote against Mr Aseidu-Nketiah. John Dramani Mahama has insinuated that he does not have any preference amongst the candidates contesting for executive positions but one of his ardent supporters just openly contradicted him in favour of the retention of the incumbent Chairman at the upcoming elections. 

Then comes a National Vice-Chairman of the NDC openly taking sides in the upcoming Chairmanship elections in a manner which leaves one in doubt whether he understood what he was saying when in the teeth of Mr Ofosu-Ampofo’s plea of his ethnicity as an Akyem as one of his qualifications, Mr Said Sinare said: 

“The national chairman that our party, the NDC, needs for the battle in 2024 must be a man who has been de-tribalised, a man whose humanity, humility, philanthropy, and respect for everyone, regardless of tribe, religion, or political affiliation, define him. a man who truly embodies national harmony and puts his party’s interests first…. Voting against Ampofo will be the biggest political blunder or treason our party will ever commit.” 

Having worked as the General Secretary of the NDC for seventeen years, Mr Aseidu-Nketiah is entitled to contest for the ultimate position of Chairman of the NDC. Mr Aseidu-Nketiah was also entitled and deserved as of right to have wished to be nominated to be the Vice-Presidential candidate of the NDC in the 2020 elections and committed no sin for that wish. In any case, why single out Mr Aseidu-Nketiah, out of the three contestants seeking to replace the incumbent Chairman of the NDC? How does the publication of leaked audio recordings attributed to Mr Aseidu-Nketiah help the NDC as part of spilling secrets after the Chairmanship elections? 

Mr Ofosu-Ampofo, Mr Aseidu-Nketiah, Nii Armah Ashitey, and Mr Samuel Yaw Adusei who are contesting for the NDC Chairmanship position need a level playing field to enable each of them to convince the delegates to the NDC conference of his merit and what he brings to the table so that the delegates may choose who they think can best serve the interest of the NDC. The plea of Akyem ethnicity by Mr Ofosu-Ampofo is negative electioneering and sins against the 31st December Revolution tradition. The interventions by leading members of the NDC who should not openly be taking sides in the electioneering with ethnic undertones as the qualification for election as the Chairman of the NDC is also doing and will do more damage to the Congress we founded in 1992, going forward. 

The founder of the NDC, the late President Jerry John Rawlings, and the late Mr Justice D. F. Annan who co-chaired the meeting at the Bluegate to agree to form the NDC were not ethnocentric or tribalistic. The introduction of the ethnic and tribal element in the Chairmanship election of the NDC is a dangerous development that does great damage to the image of the late President Jerry John Rawlings and the late Mr Justice D. F. Annan a few days before the celebration of the ideals of the 31st December Revolution. It can only aid Nana Akufo-Addo’s long game for the election of 2024 to install his preferred candidate as President of Ghana on 7 January 2025. We founded the NDC in 1992 for grassroots citizens. Do not betray the people and the 31st December Revolutionary cause. 

Everyday things are getting worse

Time so hard, why oh why oh Lord

Time so hard, look upon Maud and Gerard.”

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMATION

The sacrifice of the national good of our country by our elected Members of Parliament for their personal selfishness and partisan interest in contravention of the letter and the spirit of the 1992 Constitution is the main, and indeed the sole reason why for some time now, “Everyday things are getting worse” for the economic and social survival of the ordinary Ghanaian who elected them.

The simultaneous display of gamesmanship and posturing on 25 October 2022 by both the majority members of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) in Parliament and the minority members of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in Parliament was a planned, rehearsed, and executed maneuver actuated by a selfish self-preservation interest of the members of parliament to secure their chances of re-election to Parliament at the 2024 parliamentary elections.

The majority and minority members of parliament bear more responsibility and blame for failing in their oversight responsibilities over the executive branch of government that has brought the country to its present sorry state of hardship and poverty. The gamesmanship that began on 25 October 2022 was a clever but unsophisticated way of seeking to divert the attention of their constituents and the public generally from the self-serving compromises they made with the executive in the performance of their constitutional functions that has led our dear country to our current messy situation for the first time in our history.

The best defence, it is said, is to attack. By falsely equating their membership of parliament with superior knowledge over the rest of their countrymen they sought to deceive us by the conflict strategy of shifting the entire blame onto the Ministers of Finance whom they had approved less than two years ago in a bi-partisan manner for appointment to office. The attempt by the majority and minority members of parliament to distance themselves from the mess caused to the nation’s economy and social fabric by the indecent compromises and collusion by parliament with the executive in bringing the national economy to its lowest level in our history fails upon any casual analysis of the role played by Parliament in bring the nation to our present situation.

What happened on the opening of the parliamentary session on 25 October 2022 demonstrates how the pursuit of purely partisan political and economic self-interest of our parliamentarians undermines the letter and spirit of the 1992 Constitution to create a country in which there would be a fair distribution of its resources and the sharing of responsibilities by citizens on a non-partisan basis. Both the majority and the minority members of parliament agree on one thing. The majority wants the Minister for Finance and the Minister of State in the Ministry of Finance removed from office by the President before the presentation and approval of the November 2022 Budget Statement and Economic Policy upon their ultimatum to the President. The minority caucus also wants the Minister of Finance removed from office by the President pursuant to a motion and vote of censure by Parliament.

The only reason they could not come together to pursue an agreed and common cause to achieve their object is the selfish desire to take political credit for the removal of the two ministers which in their respective perception will enhance their chances of being re-elected to Parliament at the 2024 elections. Underpinning the inability of the members of parliament to adopt a common strategy and tactics to achieve what is a common and agreed objective is the use of the gamesmanship arising from their actions for horse trading for personal economic benefits in the ensuing negotiations for the settlement of their respective demands with the executive branch of government led by the President.

The contradictory and divergent adoption of a mismatching conflict strategy of gamesmanship has manifested in the failure so far by the majority members to achieve theselfish and partisan objectives underpinning their original ultimatum to the President. The fact that the majority members of the New Patriotic Party gave the President an irrevocable commitment not to approve the November 2022 Budget Statement and Economic Policy but cave in within hours of making the irrevocable commitment to the people of Ghana when they met the President was a clear indication to the nation of the selfishness of their motives for horse trading for personal benefits that their press conference was intended to evoke. As one of the rebels said in letting the cat out of the bag in an interview, the replacement for the Ministers to be sacked must be made from the membership of the majority caucus.

And nobody who pretends that by walking back on their statements and ceding to the President the right to consider their ultimatum after the conclusion of the IMF negotiations, and the presentation and approval of the November 2022 Budget Statement and Economic Policy, the majority members of parliament from the New Patriotic Party had kept their promises to their constituents made at their press conference, is not living by any semblance  of rational reasoning and argumentation.

An analysis of the pronouncements and posturing from the gamesmanship by the minority members to achieve their objectives through a vote of censure points to the ultimate failure of their endeavour because the achievement of that objective in a secret vote of the requisite total number of members required to carry the vote will lead to the implosion of the New Patriotic Party as a viable political party in the next election. And most of the majority members of parliament would lose their seats in the election to the next parliament at the 2024 elections.

The selfish economic and political power motives underpinning the divergent positions or tactics adopted by both sides of the House for the achievement of an otherwise common objective of removing the two ministers from office should demonstrate to the electorate that these members of parliament cannot be relied upon to fight for the citizens’ objective, and non-partisan economic and social interest for which the 1992 Constitution was promulgated.

Indeed, an examination and analysis of open source materials and intelligences points to the fact that the grandstanding displayed by members of the majority in parliament and the members of the minority in parliament on 25 October 2022 was planned to take place on the first day of the opening of parliament from the long vacation to give the appearance that members of parliament from both sides had listened to their constituents and taken action on the complaints, suffering, and draconian economic hardship being experienced in the country at the least opportunity. The intelligence emanating from parliament coheres with the fact that the majority and the minority together with their leadership had consulted or knew about the other’s impending action and their timing for 25 October 2022 but could not agree on who should take credit for the eventual outcome for reasons of purely partisan political and economic self-interest of the two sides.

The foregoing introduction and summation were derived from the detailed examination and analysis made hereunder of the simultaneous events ushered in by the gamesmanship of the members of the majority and minority caucus of parliament on 25 October 2022 to remove the two Ministers in the Ministry of Finance and the after mouths of those events.

THE MAJORITY CAUCUS’ ULTIMATUM AND ITS COLLAPSE

The morning of 25 October 2022 saw a majority of the members of parliament of the New Patriotic Party call a press conference at which they issued (what the public perceived as gullible people were intended to take seriously as) an unprecedent ultimatum to the President to remove Ken Ofori-Atta, the Minister for Finance, and Charles Adu-Boahen, the Minister of State in the Ministry of Finance. On the same day, and morning, and simultaneously the Minority Leader announced the filing of (what the same perceived gullible public was intended to take seriously as) a motion of censure to begin the process to remove Ken OforiAtta, the Minister for Finance from office.

The grievances, ultimatum and the irrevocable commitment made by the majority members of the New Patriotic Party is captured in the following words from the press conference:

We have had occasion to defend allegations of conflict of interest, lack of confidence and trust against leadership of our Finance Ministry. The recent developments within our economy are of great concern to the greater majority of members of our caucus and ourconstituents….The summary of our concern leads to the plea that the Minister for Finance, Ken Ofori-Atta, and the minister of state at the Ministry of Finance, Charles Adu Boahene, should be removed from office….Meanwhile, we want to serve notice that until such personsas aforementioned are made to resign or removed from office, we members of the Majority Caucus here in Parliament will not participate in any business of government by or for the president or by any other minister….If our request is not responded to positively, we’ll not be present for the Budget hearing, neither would we participate in the debate.

Within hours, the rebel members of majority in parliament retreated from their threats and irrevocable commitments after a stern rebuke from the President for their failure to haveraised the issues with him before going public. The President is reported by the government’s authoritative Asaase Radio to have told them that he was in no doubt about the determination of the two Ministers of Finance to conclude the negotiations with the Fund, secure additional financing and finalise the 2023 Budget and appropriation to bring relief to Ghanaians – “You do not change a captain who is steering the ship out of a storm,” the President is reported to have authoritatively lectured them. The President, according to Asaase Radio’s reportage:

…. asked for the two men, with their wealth of contacts and experience built up over the years and in their current jobs, to be allowed to conclude the Budget and IMF negotiations. If, at the end of this, the vast number of MPs are still not happy, he said, he has no problem with listening to their concerns and taking appropriate steps to address these. Although he understands the MPs’ anxieties, the president said, for him, given the exigencies of recent challenges, this is also a time for cool heads.

The Majority Leader, Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu, was reported to have ingratiatingly welcomed the sentiments expressed by the President and told him that the leadership of the Majority Caucus in Parliament will meet with the MPs who demanded the Finance Minister’s resignation, on Wednesday afternoon consult the “old lady” and revert to the President. Asaase News dropped the following hint “that some of the ringleaders are still adamant that the duo must go.” It reported further what it had learnt as follows:

That some are even planning another press conference to say the position remains the same, and that there are moves to organise a demonstration against the two ministers… However, a large number of backbenchers who were also for the removal of Ofori-Atta and Adu Boahene are now shifting to the position that the two must be allowed first to prepare the Budget and conclude the IMF negotiations.

There now appears to be an agreement between the members of parliament of the New Patriotic Party and their government that the parliamentary grievances against Minister of Finance and Minister of State for Finance will be dealt with after the completion of the IMF negotiations, and the presentation and approval of the November 2022 Budget Statement and Economic Policy by Parliament. The Majority Leader, who is also the Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, appears to have urged his side to bear with the President until after the completion of the appropriation of the budget when he was quoted as having said in an interview that:

And that is how come for the avoidance of doubt I said let us include the appropriation so that there’s no doubt in anybody’s mind that after the budget has been read then agitations will start again….We’ll continue to engage and I believe we’ll find an amicable resolution to this.

Indeed the Majority Leader was just attempting to play both sides of the game with his rebel members and with the Presidency. This is the man who had told Citi Breakfast Show on 26 October 2022 that:

I have listened to their concerns, about the fact that if the Finance Minister is removed it might help us in our recovery. I told them I appreciate their concerns. My only concern was the timing. Considering our negotiations with the IMF and how far it has come, and how it may affect the progress we have made so far….I appealed to them to hold their horses, that was on Sunday, and I even revealed some discussions I had earlier with the President, and I thought that was going to calm their nerves a bit. But at the end of the day, I was unable to dissuade them.(Emphasis supplied)

According to human sources acquainted with this matter, the President had assured the Majority Leader at an earlier meeting with the President to convey the grievances of the rebel members of the majority caucus to the President before the storm broke that there was going to be a reshuffle of his Ministers in January 2023 without saying who were going to be casualties of the reshuffle. But the minority caucus had been threatening a motion of censure against the Minister for Finance since July 2022 before Parliament went on recess. The majority caucus knew through their moles within the minority about the intended execution of minority’s threat upon the opening of Parliament on 25 October 2022. The majority caucus in parallel determined not to allow the minority side to upstage them and take credit for the removal of the Minister for Finance from office. Doing nothing or acquiescing in the minority move would clearly have endangered the prospects of most the majority caucus members from returning to the next Parliament after the 2024 elections.

As in every inter-group conflict, there are those within the New Patriotic Party members of parliament who are dissatisfied with the conclusions at the 25 October 2022 meeting with the President, NPP Executives, and the majority caucus at which there was no undertaking or promise by the President that their ultimatum had been accepted for execution after the approval of budget and the passage of the Appropriated Bills by Parliament. The posturing, therefore, continues by some of the rebels in the majority caucus, with the Majority Leader who is also a core member of the executive branch, playing the delicate balancing role of throwing wool over the eyes of the perceived gullible public that the whole majority caucus has now aligned itself with the demands of the original 80 rebels in ensuring that the Ministers are removed after the passage of the Appropriation Bills.

THE SUPPRESSION OF SUSPECTED CORRUPTION AND CORRUPTION-RELATED OFFENCES

The vain glorious pronouncements and ultimatum for the sacking of the ministers before the presentation and approval of the November 2022 Budget Statement and Economic Policy to parliament and its shameful recantation within hours in meek and sheepish diffidence to the President’s rebuke, demands or firm instructions to the rebels to toe the party line without any commitment by the President to accede to any of demands of the rebels was further compounded by the news that on the very next day, Tuesday 26 October 2022, an unnamed businessman approached the rebelling members of the majority in parliament with incentives in a fat envelope to persuade them to rescind their ultimatum for the removal of the Ministers in the Ministry of Finance from office.

The bribe or inducement according to the audio recording of the interview on Joy FM was first received by the rebel group before granting audience to the businessman and later returned to the unnamed businessman when the group decided it could not do his bidding: he was told not to involve himself in the dispute. The interview which was supposed to be a display of honour and integrity by the rebels in the majority caucus does not appear to have achieved the purpose in the narration when examined and analyzed critically:

The man came and wanted us to turn round and reconsider the decision to appeal to the President to relieve Ofori-Atta of his post. We listened to him and he said that when he had come here to talk to us, we had given him the opportunity to address us and therefore he wants to make certain demands from us. Indeed, he got disappointed when we said we cannot take anything. It is not for the reason of money that we are making this demand. We are motivated by our conscience and therefore it is not about materialism. That is where we returned the money to him and he took it away.

The recoding of the interview as reported by Class FM is blunt on the return of the bribe which had been received already as follows: “We refunded it to him on the principle that we are not doing what we are doing for money. Because of that, we did not open the envelope to even know how much was in it.” (Emphasis supplied)

A rational, reasonable, and level-headed understanding of the foregoing portion of the interview is that the interest of the business community in ensuring tranquility in the political space is a legal exception for affluent citizens from the business community to bribe our members of parliament and get way with their criminal offences. This is what the leader of the rebels was reported to have said in the interview that gives credence to the foregoing conclusion:

He said that it is not in the interest of the business community to see this confusion in governance and therefore for the sake of the business community and their businesses let us ensure tranquility in the political space.

The leader of the rebels is reported to have “…indicated that the MPs did not find any need to investigate the actions of the businessman since he was only interested in ensuring tranquility within the leadership of the government.”

MAJORITY LEADER THROWS IN WRENCH OF A KNOWN BUSSINESSMAN WITH WAYS OF DEALING WITH BOTH SIDES OF THE HOUSE

The Majority Leader for reasons of his own threw in a wrench to put a damper on the unconvincing reasons assigned by the rebel members of the majority caucus for not finding the need to report the unnamed businessman to law enforcement for investigation when he informed the public in an interview on Joy FM on 1 November 2022 that the businessman in question is a known figure in the business community who has his way of dealing with both sides of the political divide. The Majority Leader thus underscored and brought to the fore again corruption by lobbyist, businessmen, the executive, and other power elites which Ghanaians had suspected all along to be pervasive and endemic on both sides of the political divide to the detriment of the common national interest enjoined by the Constitution to guide parliament.

Sources from within the minority side of Parliament have whispered in confidence the identity of the unnamed businessman as members of the minority saw the businessman when he came to Parliament to engage the rebel members of the majority caucus. The minority caucus, like the majority caucus is also not prepared to rock the boat by going public with a public disclosure of the identity of the businessman who admittedly has his own corrupt way of dealing with both sides of the political divide in parliament. The response to the question whether the businessman had also engaged the minority with fat envelopes to go slow with the motion of censure on the Minister of Finance was met with the answer: “No comments!”

The Honourable Members of Parliament who were pretending to be pursuing a constitutional duty on behalf of their constituents choose to participate in or to abate the unnamed businessman’s crime of bribery and corruption by not reporting the matter immediately to any law enforcement agency for impartial investigation and possible prosecution to vindicate the integrity of Parliament. The Majority Leader admitted that he had knowledge of the bribery and took no action until the public started baying for law enforcement investigation when he made an about turn to say that the matter was under investigation to establish the facts and reasons for any intended bribing of the members of parliament in the performance of their duties.

But the interview granted to Joy FM by the leader of the rebel members of the New Patriotic Party establishes conclusively that there was the giving and the taking of bribe in a fat envelope by the unnamed businessman to the rebel parliamentary group and an alleged return of the envelopes when the group upon second thought decided against keeping the bribe. This narrative leads any rational citizen to one and only one irresistible conclusion that corruption and corruption-related activity took place between the giver and receivers of the fat envelope in the otherwise august House of our Parliament of all places. The return of the fat envelope does not negate the consummation of the suspected commission of the crime of corruption.

The Majority Leader’s attempt to throw dust into the eyes of the public with an on-going investigation after his in-group’s admission of the abetment of or receipt of the proceeds of the crime of corruption or corruption-related offence is the newest display of the height of ingenuity which only parliamentarians the world over who have developed and perfected the art of parliamentary deception to hoodwink their gullible public can indulge in and which one questions at the peril of being cited for contempt of parliament.

And the Majority Leader knows too well that the identity of the businessman who the leader of the rebel group refused report to law enforcement for investigation will not be publicly known for investigation and prosecution. In any case, where is the proof that any bribes were indeed returned? This can only be established when a report is made to law enforcement for an impartial investigation to take place for possible prosecution of the giver and the takers of the bribe. In the meantime, the public is left to guess on whose behalf the businessman was acting to bribe the members of the majority in parliament. The probability that the businessman also corrupted members of the minority caucus too who were at the same time seeking to remove the same Ministers from office on motion of censure cannot be settledwithout an investigation into the suspected corruption of the rebel MPs.

THE PURPOSEFUL RELEASE OF DELAYED FOUR STATUTORY PAYMENTS FOR THE BENEFIT OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT

A few days after the filing of the motion for a vote of censure of the Minister for Finance, Ken Ofori Atta, and the demand by the majority members of the majority caucus for the removal of Minister of Finance and the Minister of State at the Ministry of Finance, Charles Adu Boahene and following upon the bribery or attempted bribery of the rebel members of parliament by the so-called affluent businessman, the Minister of Finance was reported online to have “released four major statutory payments in respect of Common Fund (Quarters 1 and Two), MPs Moni Monitoring and Evaluation (Second quarter), Q1 and Q2 of District Common Fund as well as the Disability Relief Fund to districts”. One of the rebel New Patriotic Party members of parliament from the Afigya Kwabre North Constituency in the Ashanti Region, Charles Adomako-Mensah, confirmed and justified the payments as a member of a panel discussion on Metro TV as follows:

“That is true, it is true. The payments were supposed to come and there were delays, and it has been paid. It is true….Uncle Kwasi, these are statutory payments, there were delays fortunately they have been paid, thank God, they have been paid…they’ve been paid because they have to be paid….I am not too sure if it was because of the demands …the fact that it was after but I am not too sure if it was because of the demands….Oh Randy, delays in Common Fund payments are not something new.”

Analytically, the Member of Parliament’s answers appear to summarize the sentiments of his colleagues on both sides of the parliamentary divide of a sense of selfish entitlement when their financial self-interest is at stake as members of the House. This overrides their responsibility to the plight of the several contractors and businessmen from their constituencies whose businesses have burst or are at the verge of collapsing because the Ministry of Finance has for years refused or failed to honoured payments for work done and completed for the Government.

The timing of the release of the statutory payments which have been a sore grievance of all members of parliament against the intransigence of the Minister of Finance was either an ingratiating move by the Minister to soften the adversaries or intended to influence the outcome of the parliamentarians to remove the two ministers from office. Whichever way one looks at it, it smacks of suspected corruption which Kissi Agyebeng, the Special Prosecutor will rather classify as peddling of influence or influence peddling which are not covered by the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959) to avoid a possible prosecution in a court of law.

THE MINORITY’S MOTION OF CENSURE AGAINST THE MINISTER FOR FINANCE AND ITS FATE

On the same day and morning of 25 October 2022 the Minority Caucus in Parliament claimed to have successfully filed a motion of censure to initiate the processes to remove the Finance Minister from office. The Minority Leader, Hon. Haruna Iddrisu, told Parliament on 25 October 2022 in a contribution in parliament that Ofori-Atta “cannot manage or supervise his own mess, he is not fit for the purpose”. He, therefore, urged his colleagues on the other side of the House to join the Minority to ensure Ofori Atta is removed from office.

Hon. Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, the Member of Parliament for North Tongu is said have confirmed in a post on his social media that: “We’re glad there’s positive indication some of our NPP colleagues will support us.” But the Majority Member of Parliament for the Subin Constituency, Hon. Eugene Boakye Antwi, dispelled the perception that the 80 Majority MPs who also want the removal of the Minister for Finance, Ken Ofori-Atta, were going to support the Minority Caucus’s motion of censure to remove the Minister of Finance. He said:

I don’t think we are going to support the NDC to remove our Minister. We have just made a separate call to the President of Ghana…. We are on a different tangent; not the same as the NDC. They are going through a censure motion…. We have demonstrated to the whole country today that it is not NDC members seeking the removal of Ken Ofori Atta. It is rather his own members of Parliament who are not happy with the performance of Ken Ofori-Atta.

A subsequent objection by the Deputy Majority Leader, Alexander Kwamina Afenyo-Markin, to the competence of and the admission of the motion of censure against the Minister of Finance sponsored by Alhaji Mohammed-Mubarak Muntaka, and 128 other Members of Parliament (MPs) being on the Order Paper of the House on grounds of lack of sufficient particulars was overruled by the Speaker of Parliament. The Speaker took the view that the concerned Ministers only needed to be told of the grounds of the motion and “I think exactly that is what has been done by the sponsors of the motion. And so, I rightfully admitted it.”

The Speaker stated further that the notice had been given for seven sitting days of Parliament, stipulating that:

Then after that 14-days from the receipt of the motion by the Speaker…and so that is what we are going by. The Minister definitely, since it is a notice to the public would have sufficient basis to prepare his defence and the Minister would be given the opportunity to submit his defence during the debate.

The Speaker concluded by stating that at the end of the day, the law was clear as to the support that such a motion should get to constitute a censure – a two-thirds majority vote of MPs was needed to censure a minister.

Minority and Majority Members to join hands in carrying through the motion of censure?

Consequently, the members of the minority National Democratic Congress in Parliament have had their motion accepted by the Speaker and tabled for debate on 10 November 2022.

There are those within the body politic who think that in spite of the gamesmanship being displayed by both sides as to who should take credit for removing Ken Ofori Atta and Charles Adu Boahene from office, should the vote of censure go to secret balloting the members of the disgruntled New Patriotic Party will join the 129 members of the National Democratic congress to achieve their common objective of removing the two ministers from office.

The available facts, intelligence, and a critical analysis of the reality points to the minority motion of censure also failing. The cost to the members of the majority New Patriotic Party in joining the members of the minority National Democratic Congress to remove the Minister for Finance from office on the minority’s motion of censure will be too high a price to be paid by the whole majority caucus of parliament and ultimately affect the very survival and existence of New Patriotic Party as political party in Ghana.

Because the minority and majority members of parliament are acting in their individual and partisan self-interest to ingratiate themselves to their constituents as the ones who fought the President to ameliorate the economic hardship felt by their constituents, in order to safeguard their re-election to Parliament in 2024, their strategies and tactics for the removal of the two ministers could not be coordinated as a bi-partisan endeavour. The grounds upon which the minority seeks to remove the Minister for Finance from office are grounds on which the minority had earlier compromised with the majority in parliament during the approval process of the Ministers by Parliament or are ones that are subject to on-going investigations by committees of parliament, and therefore sub judice for purposes of the filing and commencement of a fair motion of censure process.

It is imperative because of the gamesmanship between the majority and minority members of parliament to take credit for saving the country from the economic mess they each contributed to by their laxity of oversight of the government to state the grounds of the motion of censure to refresh our memories:

“1. Despicable conflict of interest ensuring that he directly benefits from Ghana’s economic woes as his companies receive commissions and other contractual advantages, particularly from Ghana’s debt overhang.

2. Unconstitutional withdrawals from the Consolidated Fund in blatant contravention of Article 178 of the 1992 Constitution supposedly for the construction of the President’s Cathedral;

3. Illegal payment of oil revenue into offshore accounts in flagrant violation of Article 176 of the 1992 Constitution;

4. Deliberate and dishonest misreporting of economic data to Parliament;

5. Fiscal reckless leading to the crash of the Ghana Cedi which is currently the worst performing currency in the world;

6. Alarming incompetence and frightening ineptitude resulting in the collapse of the Ghanaian economy and excruciating cost of living crisis;

7 Gross mismanagement of the Ghanaian economy which as occasioned untold and unprecedented hardship”.

In spite of the similarity of the above grounds of the minority’s motion of censure with the ultimatum by the rebels of the majority caucus for seeking to remove the Minister for Finance from office, the motion of censure cannot and will not be supported by the members of the majority caucus for reasons of self-preservation. The New Patriotic Party, its members in parliament, and the government would from the conflict studies point of view have suffered such irreparable damage to their reputation and standing before Ghanaians and the whole world from the success of such a vote of censure introduced by the minority that all that will be left of the NPP and its parliamentarians will be the destructive internal escalation of in group antagonism that may eventually lead to it splitting or to its demise as a viable political party.

CONCLUSIONS

The simultaneous deceptive actions by the majority and minority side in parliament were intended primarily to assuage the anger and disappointment of their constituents that both sides of the parliamentary divide shared the suffering and hardship brought upon the nation by the economic and social policies of the executive branch under the President. The assumption behind this insult to the intelligence of the public which both sides in Parliament have always perceived to be gullible people was their conviction that the mass of the population cannot on their own discern the facts in their plain sight that the President’s mismanagement of the economic and social policies could only have been possible with the support and cooperation of Parliament.

Their constituents are supposed not to be able to reason that the Constitution had clearly apportion to the legislative branch of government the mandatory function of being the bulwark and gatekeeper against any breaches of the peoples trust by the President in any pursuit of misguided economic and social policies detrimental to the wellbeing of their constituents and this country as a whole.

Ken Ofori Atta and Charles Adu Boahene were vetted and approved in dubious circumstances less than two years ago in a bi-partisan manner by the very members of parliament who on 25 October 2022 were sacrificing them for removal from office to divert public attention from their respective roles in enabling the creation of the messy economic situation in the country. All questions about their competence, conflict of interest, and the harshness of our social and economic circumstance as a nation were raised by civil society and other better enlightened and knowledgeable citizens within the public and bought to the notice of all the members of Parliament.

Now is the time, therefore, for the Minority Leader, Haruna Iddrisu, to honestly tell the public the consideration that motivated him as the Minority Leader and ranking member of the Appointments Committee to have seconded the motion for the approval of the report of the Appointments Committee presented to the plenary by the Majority Chief Whip Frank Annor Dompreh on behalf of the chairman and first deputy Speaker Joseph Osei-Owusu who was presiding when he seconded the motion knowing that he was not satisfied with the performance of the nominee, Ken Ofori-Atta, who in Mr. Iddrisu’s words must face the consequences of running down the economy for the past four years. The Majority Leader, Osei Kyei Mensah-Bonsu who is also now appearing to be holier than thou, and the Minority Leader, Haruna Iddrisu led the bi-partisan approval processes in parliament with the very so  called 80 rebels of the NPP, and those in the minority now championing the censure motion.

Now is also the time for the Minority Leader to reconcile his boastfulness in the viability of his whip when he said in an interview in relation to the motion for censure of the Minister for Finance that: “I have issued a nine-line whip, not even three-line whip, three times three …and we will stand strong on this matter,” with his earlier interview on Pan African TV when he said, inter alia, that:

If you put that to a vote and you saw the embarrassing outcome of Hawa Koomson, Kojo Oppong-Nkrumah, Kwesi, any elected MP is an adult, I Haruna Iddrisu cannot accompany an NDC MP into a ballot box to guide him how to exercise his vote. He is responsible enough. Mine is to issue the party whip, which is the directive that we expect you to stand against this policy, nothing more. And as an adult, respecting the secrecy of the ballot, I cannot be held responsible.

It is imperative that the leadership of parliament are held accountable for their deceptive and contradictory words designed to cheat the intelligence of the public which is made up of citizens who are better knowledgeable and hounourable than some of those who by chance find themselves sitting in Parliament.

The public needs to guard its expectations from the possible outcome of the selfish and self-serving gamesmanship from the majority and minority members of Parliament struggling for re-election to parliament after collaborating with the executive branch to lead the nation into the harshest economic and social suffering in our history. There is no better warning in our present situation than the words of Sammy Gyamfi, the National Democratic Congress’s National Communications Officer on 4 March 2021 when Ken Ofori-Atta and other Ministers were approved with the suspicious support of the minority in parliament. He wrote on his

Facebook comments that:

Comrades, the betrayal we have suffered in the hands of the Speaker of Parliament, Rt. Hon. Alban Bagbin, the leadership of our Parliamentary group, particularly Hon. Haruna Iddrissu and Hon. Muntaka Mubarak, and dozens of our own MPs, is what strengthens me to work hard for the great NDC to regain power. They brazenly defied the leadership of the party and betrayed the collective good for their selfish interest. And we, must not let them succeed in their parochial quest to destroy the NDC, the party that has done so much for them and all of us. The shame they have brought on the party will forever hang like an albatross around their necks….

These are words of wisdom if members of the National Democratic Congress in Parliament hope to gain the confidence of the public to form a Government in the future. The same words apply to the members of the New Patriotic Party in parliament as to what not to do to worsen the lost confidence of the people in their Government after the mess caused by the blind support they gave to their Government to cause the mess.

The foregoing examination and analysis has demonstrated that the gamesmanship that members of both sides of parliament on 25 October 2022 pretended to separately pursue in removing their common adversary on similar grounds and reasons could be a scam to ensure their re-election to parliament after their contribution to the current economic mess of the country. Hopefully, patriots after reading this piece will be steeled against being disappointed by the eventual failure of the motion of censure after the failure by the majority to remove the ministers before the presentation and approval of the November 2022 Budget Statement and Economic Policy in Parliament.

Let us continue to put Ghana First! God save Ghana!

Martin A. B. K. Amidu

Ghanaian patriots and civil society organizations should, therefore, heed the signal of impunity sent out by government to use the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as a smokescreen behind which to ram down the throat of Ghanaians an austerity budget in November 2022 without any extensive and in-depth transparent and accountable consultations with “We the People” as required under any democracy.

In the November 2021 Budget for the year 2022, this government rammed down our throats the E-Levy that went to Parliament without any prior consultation with the generality of the

people and stakeholders. It is an understatement to say that a majority of Ghanaians were against the E-Levy but with arrogance and impunity, the government corruptly bought its way with the political elite to approve and enact the E-Levy into law.

The consequent reaction from Ghanaians is there for all to see how successful a reception that policy received and is receiving. Hopefully, the government has not forgotten the length of time and labour it took it to organize post facto consultations with Ghanaians after it had presented the 2022 Budget Statement to Parliament without a prior respect for the views of the ordinary voters of this country.

But this is a government that does not learn any lesson from its unpopular economic policies. It, therefore, impudently refuses to be guided by the rhymes of history. This Government operates on the assumption that Ghana is a satellite state of international capital and its neocolonialist masters to the extent that the compradors now ruling this country have developed such a relationship with and control over the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that it is capable of fast-tracking “…negotiations with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to ensure key aspects of the programme are reflected in the 2023 budget statement”. The audacity of the Minister for Finance to announce this intention of the Government at a press briefing on Wednesday, 28 September 2022 is supposed to be:

“In line with the President’s dialogue with the IMF Managing Director, Kristalina Georgieva, negotiations will be fast-tracked to ensure that key aspects of the programme are reflected in the 2023 Annual Budget Statement in November 2022.”

We the People are entitled to know the content of the dialogue the President, a well-known

comprador bourgeoisie who has run this country into its present economic mess has had with the IMF Managing Director, Kristalina Georgieva, that they have both already sealed the fate of Ghanaians from being part of or privy to the ongoing negotiations which she had agreed with the President will form part of the Minister for Finance’s November 2022 Budget Statement to Parliament.

As is usual with developing and emerging nations, the international community has stood by while the natural resources of this country have been mismanaged by this government for the benefit of its international collaborators and facilitators. The new normal is for the looted resources of this nation to be secreted away in offshore companies in the British Bailiwick of Jersey, the British Overseas Territories of the Cayman Islands, the British Overseas Territories of the Virgin Islands, and the like, to the knowledge of their foreign collaborators without any eyebrows raised.

The posture of the President and his Family and Friends when it comes to mismanaging the wealth of this nation for and with their foreign collaborators reminds one of what Craig Murray, a former Deputy British High Commissioner to Ghana wrote about the IMF on 27 June 2015 in an article – “IMF and US set to ruin Ghana”. He said, inter alia, that:

“Indeed in 30 years of close experience, the net result of all IMF activity in Africa is to channel economic resources to westerners – and not to ordinary western people, but to the wealthiest corporations and especially to western bankers.”

Dr Cassiel Ato Forson, the Ranking Member of the Finance Committee of Parliament in a riposte to the Minister for Finance’s categorical statement doubts that the government can conclude an acceptable programme with the IMF before the 2023 budget is considered and approved by Parliament. In his own words:

“I doubt in the next six weeks we are going to have a programme. That will be a magic of a lifetime. It will mean we are just going to be yes men and accept everything they say.”

Dr Ato Forson is one person who fought tenaciously against the imposition of the draconian E-Levy on Ghanaians and was immediately targeted for his unbending views when he could have sold his conscience like some of his other colleagues. Indeed, if Dr Ato Forson is listening and watching, then he must have read the lips of President Akufo-Addo through his cousin, the Ken Ofori-Atta, the Minister for Finance who has given notice that the suffering of Ghanaians occasioned by the mismanagement of our economy by their Family and Friends government provides them the opportunity to use the IMF negotiations as means of carrying through all the diabolical policies that enables them to build annuities abroad with the resources of this country.

The E-Levy, for instance, is to be reviewed and targeted at ensuring that a lot of Ghanaians pay the levy even under the present unbearable economic mess the President has created for the ordinary person in the street. And listen to the angels from this Government who are talking about indiscipline, corruption, and leakages when they say in relation to the E-Levy and the ongoing IMF negotiations that:

“Such exercises form part of an ongoing drive to ensure we take significant steps forward in remedying long-standing challenges with domestic revenue mobilization, indiscipline, corruption, and leakages…. Towards this therefore we are looking at areas around the E-Levy to ensure its efficient implementation.”

Ghanaians deserve an explanation as to why the Tanzanian Government is able to manage its economy by abolishing the levies imposed on digital transactions on its citizens with effect from 1 October 2022 while the Government of Ghana which boasts of more natural resources is still determined to behaving like a vampire sucking the economic blood of its citizens (See BBC Africa, 20 September 2022). Is Tanzania on a different planet where the effects of Covid -19 pandemic and the crisis in Ukraine are absent? We need to know!

This is a Government that is brazenly violating the laws of Ghana by not paying revenues accruing from the nation’s oil fields into the Petroleum Holding Fund (PHF) as confirmed in the 2022 semi-annual report on petroleum receipts by the Public Interest and Accountability Committee (PIAC). This is a government that is so indiscipline and corrupt that it transfers revenues accruing from about 944,164 bbls of crude lifting in the Jubilee and TEN fields amounting to One Hundred Million United States dollars (USD100million) to a company established in a safe haven without any authorization from parliament in flagrant violation of the laws of Ghana.

This is stealing from the public purse, pure and simple. I agree with former President Mahama that the stolen money ($1000 million) must be returned to the proper public account but that does not mean that the offence which has already been committed cannot be prosecuted at the appropriate opportunity.

‘The point must be stressed that no one is accusing Genser of wrongdoing. At worst, it is guilty of “excessively effective” lobbying and shrewd negotiation. But it is a private business seeking to maximise the welfare of its corporate backers who are taking a risk worth – $500 million so one can understand…’

But has the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) not now criminalised influence peddling and lobbying activities as forming part of corruption and corruption-related offences under Ghanaian law? Ghanaians cannot soon forget that the OSP made adverse findings against Ghanaian citizens and retrieved One Million Ghana Cedis (GHs1million) into its Assets Recovery and Preservation Account for influence peddling, lobbying, potential corruption, and similar new corruption offences in the alleged OSP Labianca Report. Or is there one law for Ghanaians and another law for foreign-owned companies operating in Ghana, particularly when the ‘“excessively effective” lobbying and shrewd negotiation’ involves a whopping USD1.5billion loss to the public purse? Maybe the OSP is waiting for a petition on Genser!

The Government is already lame duck. It has less than two years to manage the affairs of this country to honestly turn our fortunes around. It is, therefore, hurriedly making all efforts to raise Five Hundred Million United States dollars ($500Million) by forward felling our patrimony of oil reserves to a collaborating company of the Family and Friends from international capital. The amount is to be raised and spent by this same corrupt government while giving away our oil at a fixed price of $65 per barrel no matter future appreciations in the market price of oil. Ghanaians will have to pay in next year’s budget for all these inequities of this Government as part of the IMF negotiated package.

In the background, we have heard the National Democratic Congress (NDC), Minority in Parliament telling Ghanaians again that they will not allow our natural resources to be shared between the comprador government and its international capitalist collaborators to the detriment of the suffering masses of Ghanaians.

We have heard such apparently solemn commitments and pronouncements before. We heard them when this Government was vetting its Ministers at the beginning of its second term last year. We heard solemn commitments and pronouncements on the E-levy during last year’s budget presentation and eventual approval. In each of these cases we witnessed the vile compromises in which the aspirations of the ordinary man were sold to the government.

I have just read the Minority Leader changing or rationalizing the reasons assigned for the Minority in Parliament’s past shameful and distasteful conduct. When asked about the minority’s complicity in giving Ghana incompetent Ministers (who are now visiting poverty and economic sufferings on Ghanaians) he responded that:

“That’s true. I’m not sure that it is my duty to give the president competent ministers as minority opposition leaders. That is not my primary duty….We approved them and we approved them based on law. The Minority has gotten a lot of flak, particularly my person on this approval and disapproval of ministers.”

We still remember the shameful manner the E-Levy was negotiated behind the back of the cries and wailings of Ghanaians also based on the law as the Minority Leader is now rationalizing. More importantly, Ghanaians are being told by the Minority Leadership in Parliament that its duty is to issue the party whip as a directive to its members to stand against a particular policy and nothing more. The NDC Members of Parliament are at liberty to go against the party whip.

These are confessions of the bare facts and the circumstances of Ghana’s constitutional democracy today in which citizens are expected to rely as a people on the recent solemn promises and assurances that have been pouring in about the determination of the NDC in parliament to stand with the suffering mass of the people when the individual stomachs of our members of Parliament matter more than the electorate that voted them to put Ghana First in Parliament.

“Forewarned is forearmed” and “history does not repeat itself but it rhymes.” This is why it is important for patriots and crusading civil society organizations to insist on and demand transparency and accountability from the Government in the manner the negotiation with the IMF is being undertaken now. The failure of Ghanaian patriots and civil society to speak up now will lead to grand extortion and corruption when the budget comes to be debated and approved both inside and outside parliament. We saw how dual Ghanaians citizens living abroad were flown into Ghana as experts and given the platform to justify the E-Levy only to return to their comfortable bases abroad. We saw how against all odds the government bought its way to have its policies approved last year.

This year, the International Monetary Fund is to be the excuse for Ghanaians being asked to tighten their belts while the political elite loosens theirs and feed fat on our sweat. We should not wait for the IMF to be used by the authors of our economic hardships to blackmail the nation and ram an austerity budget down our throats without any consultation for our inputs into and acceptance of the proposals. We have a duty to ask for transparency and accountability now. The 1992 Constitution gives us the right to do so and put Ghana First.

****

The writer is the former Attorney General and Special Prosecutor

He said the country has further been “polarised” by the Majority Leader’s E-Levy cake for his 65th birthday celebration.

“It is in pursuance of the foregoing objectives that this article examines and discusses the heightened polarization of the nation arising from Mr Kyei Mensah-Bonsu,” Martin Amidu said in an article on Saturday.

The former Attorney General opined that the current intense disagreement over the E-levy bill was deepened after what he said was seen as an opulent, arrogant, and insulting 65th birthday celebration by the Majority Leader, Osei Kyei Mensah-Bonsu by designing an E-levy cake.

“The “Mr Kyei Mensah Bonsu’s E-Levy cake for his 65th birthday” celebration provides the immediate context for understanding the public comments and reactions that led to the arrest and detention of a known political adversary of the Government’s policies, Mr Oliver Mawuse Barker-Vormawor,” he noted.

Martin Amidu contended that government under the disguise of coup mongering has gagged and intimidated persons opposed to the E-levy from exercising their constitutional rights and freedoms to free speech.

“Mr. “Kyei Mensah-Bonsu’s E-Levy cake for his 65th birthday” celebration has also led to other citizens being gagged and intimidated from exercising their constitutional rights and freedoms to free speech and thought on pain of being arrested and detained without bail at the behest of hawks and operatives of the Government under the smokescreen of coup mongering or first-degree felony offences against the safety of the state,” Martin Amidu said.

E-Levy

Finance Minister, Ken Ofori-Atta, during the presentation of the 2022 budget announced that government intends to introduce an Electronic Transactions Levy (E-levy).

The Levy, he revealed, is being introduced to “widen the tax net and rope in the informal sector.”

The proposed Levy, which was expected to come into effect in January 2022, charges 1.75% on the value of electronic transactions.

It covers mobile money payments, bank transfers, merchant payments, and inward remittances. There is an exemption for transactions up to GH¢100 per day.

Although the government has argued that it is an innovative way to generate revenue, scores of citizens and stakeholders have expressed varied sentiments on its appropriateness, with many standing firmly against it.

The adversarial conflict over the Government’s E-Levy policy eventually deepened with the uncomplimentary public reaction to what some citizens perceived to be an opulent, arrogant, and insulting 65^th birthday celebration by the Majority Leader and Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu, (which fell on Thursday 3 February 2022) amid their sufferings and the government’s intention to further tax their scarce incomes.

The “Mr Kyei Mensah Bonsu’s E-Levy cake for his 65th birthday” celebration provides the immediate context for understanding the public comments and reactions that led to the arrest and detention of a known political adversary of the Government’s policies, Mr Oliver Mawuse Barker-Vormawor, the convenor of #FixTheCountry, who was later charged unconstitutionally for the offence of treason felony.

Mr. “Kyei Mensah-Bonsu’s E-Levy cake for his 65^th birthday” celebration has also led to other citizens being gagged and intimidated from exercising their constitutional rights and freedoms to free speech and thought on pain of being arrested and detained without bail at the behest of hawks and operatives of the Government under the smokescreen of coup mongering or first-degree felony offences against the safety of the state.

The police also later arrested and detained Mr. Kwame Baffoe, the Bono Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), on 15 February 2022 and subsequently charged him with lesser offences and bailed before a court the next day for accusing former President John Mahama of high treason and/ or treason in a radio interview on 14 February 2022.

Subsequently, operatives of the government made threats to arrest and detain the Dean of the University of Ghana School of Law, Prof. Raymond Atuguba, for coup mongering and treason arising out of a public lecture he delivered at the Erata Hotel in Accra on 28 February 2022.

These developments make it imperative for every patriotic Ghanaian and lover of constitutionalism and representative democracy committed to the sustenance, preservation and defence of the 1992 Constitution to speak out boldly against the use or the threatened use of the investigatory and prosecutorial discretionary powers of the Republic entrusted to the executive branch of government in abusing the rights and freedoms of citizens to speech and thought by means of the deployment of the system of criminal justice administration for purely partisan political ends.

Any appearance of the use of the system of the criminal justice administration to intimidate, suppress or seek to suppress the lawful political activity of political adversaries in the marketplace of democratic political discourse needs to be unreservedly condemned in defence of the 1992 Constitution.

The 1992 Constitution was intended to ensure a free marketplace of ideas in a representative constitutional democratic society where the rights and freedoms of political adversaries are not suppressed or sought to be suppressed by government over-reach.

This was because the nation’s political history teaches that the contrary led to the several previous instabilities that the Ghanaian constitutional democratic processes witnessed since the darkest day of 24 February 1966 until 7 January 1993.

For almost three decades, and for the first time in Ghanaian political history, the Fourth Republican Constitution, born out of a revolution led by a retired military officer, the late President, Flt Lt. Jerry John Rawlings (Rt.), who brought it into operation under his signature and nurtured it democratically for eight years against all odds and handed over political power peacefully to an opposing political party has enabled this nation to witness the transfers of political power from one political party to another through the ballot box.

This singular achievement of the 31 December 1981 Revolution in ensuring a lasting 1992 Constitution for Ghana is what all patriots are to defend.

It is in pursuance of the foregoing objectives that this article examines and discusses the heightened polarization of the nation arising from Mr. Kyei Mensah-Bonsu, the Majority Leader and Minister for Parliamentary Affairs’ “Kyei Mensah Bonsu’s E-Levy cake for his 65^th birthday” celebration and the resulting public reactions and comments thereto leading to the deployment of the discretionary investigatory and prosecutorial powers of the executive branch of the Government of which he is a Minister of State against vocal adversaries of the government’s E-Levy policy.

MEDIA HYPE OF MR. KYEI MENSAH-BONSU’S OPULENT 65TH BIRTHDAY CELEBRATION WITH AN EDIBLE DECORATED GREEN E-LEVY CAKE

The media hype of the Minister for Parliamentary Affairs’ opulent 65^th birthday celebration is captured on several of the electronic media and is available online, but it will suffice for purposes of this discourse to use a publication by Citi Newsroom which cannot be accused of being biased against the government to underscore the reactions and comments of the public to the Government’s E-Levy policy. #CitiNewsroom has a 0:50 minutes video publication on https#m.youtube.com watch with the title: “Watch: Kyei Mensah Bonsu’s E-Levy cake for his 65^th birthday” accompanied by the following narration – ‘9 Feb 2022 – “The Majority Leader and Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu, has celebrated his 65^th birthday”’.

Joy News also carried 0:31 minutes of similar video on YouTube on the same day showing the same celebration. One needs to watch the video of the celebration of the Minister’s 65^th birthday with the decorated green edible “E-Levy” cake to understand how it could generate sentimental dissent amongst bi-partisan opponents of the Government’s E- Levy policy and pending Bill in Parliament. The public reactions and comments were swift and electric both by individuals and the media.

Citi Newsroom captured the public perception of the “Kyei Mensah Bonsu’s E-Levy cake for his 65^th birthday” on its online reportage of the event as follows:

“…. It is also not clear what the motive is considering that many Ghanaians are against the proposed Electronic Transaction Levy, and may find this decision insensitive.

Among the guests at the party were Vice President, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia; Samira Bawumia; Ashanti Regional Chairman of the NPP, Chairman Wontumi, known in real life as Bernard Antwi Boasiako; and Senyo Hosi, the Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana Chamber of Bulk Oil Distributors.

Many Ghanaians have started reacting to the photos since they started circulating online on Tuesday. Already, they are criticizing the controversial 1.75% E-levy which most people are kicking against.

Most of the social media comments have condemned the use of the image by the experienced politician, as they consider it a mockery of their opposition to the levy.”

Mr Sammy Gyamfi of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in reaction to the plush birthday party made the following post to his Facebook

“Sammy Gyamfi

Check out E-Levy cake at the plush birthday party of the Majority Leader, Hon. Osei Kyei Mensah Bonsu.

Guess what? Our Jocular Vice President and Head of the Economic Management Team at large, who has been mute on the obnoxious E-Levy policy, was the special guest of honour.

The continuous display of opulence and ostentation by the Akufo-Addo/Bawumia government at this time of excruciating hardships is nauseating and insulting to the sensibilities of suffering Ghanaians.”

The Pulse.com.gh’s Kojo Emmanuel reported that:

‘The Economic Fighters League on its part described the majority leader’s conduct as a symbolic indication that proceeds from the E-levy will be “chopped” by government officials. Taking to its Facebook page, the group described the act as a “perfect illustration of growing old without sense”.

Leader of the group, Ernesto Yeboah added that “An MP entering retirement age has just told us that he is going to take a cut of the national cake made from our own modest earnings.

“If we as a nation allow this E-Levy bill and its accompanying insult to pass then we are sick..”

Reacting and commenting on the 65^th birthday celebration by the Minister of Parliamentary Affairs of the Government, on Wednesday 9 February 2022, Osagyefo Oliver Barker- Vormawor who was in the United Kingdom but was apparently following the news in Ghana published on YouTube media concerning the opulent, flamboyant, and arrogant “Kyei Mensah-Bonsu’s E-Levy cake for his 65 birthday” celebration amidst the national economic hardship and suffering of poor citizens posted the following statement on his Facebook wall:

“If this E-Levy passes after this Cake bullshit, I will do the coup Myself.

Useless Army!”

In another and second post he stated that:

“Okay, let’s try again. If this E-Levy still passes after this cake bullshit, then may God…. Help us to resist oppressor’s rule, With all our will and might for evermore. (2x)

Useless Army.

Anaa, the value is the same?”

As a result of Mr. Barker-Vormawor’s Facebook posts, some social media users who put varying interpretations on his two contradictory and ambiguous posts called on the security agencies to arrest him over his comments (See Ghana Web of 11 February 2022 with source as dailymailgh.com).

ARREST, RESTRICTION OR DETENTION OF MR. BARKER-VORMAWOR ON ARRIVAL FROM THE UNITED KINGDOM AT THE AIRPORT AND A ‘CYNICAL’ CHARGE OF TREASON FELONY

Mr. Barker-Vormawor was picked up by the police on the evening of 11 February 2022 at the Kotoka International Airport upon his arrival from the United Kingdom. He was cautioned for the misdemeanour offence of offensive conduct conducive to the breaches of the peace contrary to section 207 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29) as the basis of his arrest as required under Article 14 of the 1992 Constitution. The police kept him in custody from 11 February 2022 until 14 February 2022 when he was brought before a District Court at Ashaiman in flagrant breach of the Constitutional injunction for any citizen who is arrested, restricted, or detained to be brought before a court within forty-eight hours or be set at liberty.

While Mr Barker-Vormawor was in police custody, the police took a written caution statement from him for the misdemeanour offence for which he was arrested at the airport and detained at the police station.

The suspect had a right to a lawyer before interrogation and the taking of any written statement by the police from him and it is axiomatic from the subsequent facts that he exercised his right to a lawyer when he gave a written statement to the police.

However, on 14 February 2022, when Mr Barker-Vormawor was surprisingly brought before a District Court for the misdemeanour and summary offence of offensive conduct conducive to breaches of the peace, the reasons for his arrest and detention changed in the court room.

His lawyers and him learnt for the first time in the court that he had been brought before the Court on a charge of treason felony under section 182(b) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29) for which the court had no bailable powers.

The nature of the unconstitutional, unethical ambush, and abuse of the investigatory and prosecutorial discretion of the executive branch of government in informing the suspect and his lawyers for the first time in the court room of the treason felony charge shocked Mr.

Akoto Ampaw, the lawyer leading the suspect’s defence team, to the extent that he is quoted by the Daily Graphic Online of 14 February 2022 to have said: “Until this morning [Monday], it was a misdemeanour, only to appear in court and be told he is being charged with treason felony which has no factual basis.”

The Daily Graphic Online reported its interaction with Mr Akoto Ampaw as follows:

“Counsel for Oliver Mawuse Barker-Vormawor who has been charged with treason felony has described the charge by the police as “cynical”.

Mr Akoto Ampaw who is leading the team defending Barker-Vormawor told Graphic Online’s Della Russel Ocloo that the charge is “cynical” and amount to “bad faith” on the part of the prosecution.

Mr Akoto Ampaw wondered why the prosecution, which initially charged Barker- Vormawor for offensive conduct conducive to the breach of the peace, which is a misdemeanour and went ahead to take a statement from him would show up in court with the charge of treason felony….

He also questioned the basis for the adjournment of the case to February 28, 2022, when the court does not have jurisdiction over the charge for which the accused was brought before it.”

THE INFRINGEMENT OF THE RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF MR. BARKER- VORMAWOR AND ABUSE OF THE SYSTEM OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION UNDER THE 1992 CONSTITUTION

Mr. Ampaw’s quoted words and the paraphrased description of his interaction with the media which is contemporaneous with the arraignment and remand of the suspect shows a clear and calculated intention on the part of the executive branch of government to infringe the fundamental human rights and freedoms of Mr Barker-Vormawor to personal liberty and respect for his human dignity (under articles 14(2) and (3) and 15(1) and (2) of the 1992 Constitution respectively) from the time of his arrest to the time of his arraignment on a provisional indictable treason felony charge before a District Court which could not exercise bailable powers in felony cases.

The Government had knowingly and intentionally turned the administration of justice into an inquisitorial and prosecutorial system to intimidate and suppress the lawful political activity, personal liberty and right to equality before the law and non-discrimination of a citizen, Mr Barker-Vormawor under articles 3, 14, 17, and 291 of the 1992 Constitution.

There is no constitutional rational justification for the conduct of the Government in the manner it executed the persecution of the suspect as the executive branch has consistently sought to justify to the public.

The answer by the Government to the public outcry and objection to the unlawful detention of Mr Barker-Vormawor for more than forty-eight hours was the lame justification that the Republic was unable to reach the Chief Justice to assign a judge or court during the weekend.

The excuse is lame and frivolous because if Mr Barker-Vormawor was in lawful custody for the offence of offensive conduct conducive to breaches of the peace with which he was charged upon his arrest and a statement taken from him in custody exercising his right to a lawyer of his choice, then the police did not need the Chief Justice or a court to exercise the discretion to grant him police enquiry bail to appear before them or a named court on a named date and time.

On the other hand, if the Government and the police had received further information and facts with which they had reasonable changed grounds for the continued arrest, restriction or detention of Mr Barker-Vormawor, without informing him of the changed reasons and his right to a lawyer of his choice, the contention that he was not brought before a court within forty-eight hours of his original arrest or detention because of lack of a court during the weekend is vacuous.

I have painstakingly read Osagyefo Oliver Barker-Vormawor’s two posts on his Facebook on 9 February 2022 while he was in the United Kingdom within the context of other posts and reaction to the ostentatious, opulent, and profane “Kyei Mensah-Bonsu’s E-Levy cake for his 65^th birthday” celebration.

It is my considered view that the two contradictory and ambiguous Facebook comments taken separately or together do not measure up to the basic ingredients of the provisional charge of the indictable offence of treason felony for which he was ‘cynically’ and surprisingly brought before an inferior court without powers of bail on 14 February 2022, and for which he is still in police custody on remand.

The perception that the unconstitutional and unlawful arrest and detention of Barker-Vormawor was politically motivated and intended to suppress his lawful political activity has further polarized this country along ideological and partisan lines which is inimical to the unity and stability the Constitution enjoins each citizen to strive to preserve in our democracy.

I had served the Republic of Ghana as the only Deputy Attorney-General in the Ministry of Justice continuously for upwards of twelve and half years with unfettered power for all subject matters of the Attorney-General’s Office and especially dealing with the system criminal justice administration.

I have also served as the Minister for the Interior of the Republic of Ghana before serving as the Attorney-General of the Republic of Ghana. I have had the privilege of working with eminent and distinguished Directors of Public Prosecutions such as Mrs Joyce Bamford Addo until she was appointed to the Supreme Court, the late Mr.

A. A. Forster, until he was appointed to the Court of Appeal, the late Mr S. G. Baddoo, until he was also appointed to the Court of Appeal (and later to the Supreme Court), and the venerable Mr J. C Amoono-Monney until his appointment to the Court of Appeal, and I will bet my last farthing that none of these distinguished and seasoned Directors of Public Prosecutions would have agreed to the police bringing Mr Barker-Vormawor to any court on an indictable charge of treason felony upon the ambiguous statements he posted on his Facebook.

And if indeed, the police did any such thing on our blind-side we would have immediately called for the police docket, reversed their action, and ensured respect for the rights and freedoms of the suspect based on the reasons for his initial arrest.

This is how it happened that on three different and separate occasions we declined to charge citizens some of whom are now eminent journalists and outspoken social commentators and activists with the offence of sedition.

The foregoing exposition demonstrates that the manner the system of criminal justice administration has been deployed punitively by the executive branch of government against the suspect gives ample grounds for the conclusion that the government untowardly abused its executive powers of the Republic to suppress or seek to suppress the lawful political activity of known political adversaries in a McCarthy-like hysteria of hunting for supposed coup mongers who are merely exercising their constitutional right to free speech and in defending the constitution by forewarning the government so that it may be forearmed against those who may wish to abrogate the Constitution in violation of article 3 thereof.

ARREST AND DETENTION OF MR KWAME BAFFOE, THE BONO REGIONAL CHAIRMAN OF THE N. P. P AND THE EQUAL APPLICATION OF THE LAW IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION

Mr Barker-Vormawor has suffered unconstitutional arrest, restriction or detention and an inferior court misled into remanding him into police custody for 14 days in the first instance and another 14 days on his second appearance on a spurious provisional treason felony charge which came to his notice for the first time on 14 February 2022 in the court room.

His relatives, friends and he were put to the expense of seeking his release at the High Court, Tema, on a Habeas Corpus application without success.

They went to the Supreme Court upon an application for certiorari which turned out to be faulty only to be assured by the office of the principal legal advisor to the Government under the Constitution that should he make a proper application for bail to a bailable court the Republic will not object it.

What a cynical assurance this was! The Government knew before or from the moment of Mr Barker-Vormawor’s arrest and detention that the government was going to keep him in undignified and unconstitutional custody to compel him to go to the needless expense of applying for bail before the suppose generosity of the Attorney-General’s Office and the Government will be showered upon him for political point-scoring in the eyes of the public.

His unconstitutional arrest and detention were orchestrated so that the Government will tell him, as the Office of the Attorney-General is now telling him in words to the effect that: “You think you are somebody.

We now have you. Go and apply for bail and we will show you mercy.” This is not a constitutional and democratic attitude enjoined by the letter and spirit of the 1992 Constitution, and it is patently inconsistent with article 3 (2) thereof.

But what makes the Government’s attitude more ‘cynical’, to borrow Mr Akoto Ampaw’s words, is the fact that the Bono Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party, Mr Kwame Baffoe, popularly known as Abronye DC granted an interview to 93.9 Hot FM on 14 February 2022 when Mr Barker-Vormawor was in detention alleging that His Excellency former President John Mahama had met with Al-Qaeda militants to assist him to topple the Government of the New Patriotic Party by force of arms.

The Bono Regional Chairman of the NPP claimed that John Mahama “approached the group in a bid to help him become president again” according to the rendition by Citi Newsroom.

I have listened several times to the video publication of the interview which is online on different media platforms in which Mr Kwame Baffoe, the Bono Regional Chairman of the NPP, says clearly and without equivocations that former President John Mahama was working with Al Qaeda (an internationally proscribed terrorist organization) to assist him to overthrow the Government of the NPP by force of arms and links Mr Barker-Vormawor’s Facebook posts and his subsequent arrest and detention for treason felony to his being one of the co-conspirators of John Mahama’s unlawful machinations to overthrow the NPP Government by force of arms.

The serious allegations of high treason and/or treason made by Mr. Kwame Baffoe against former President Mahama and the public reaction to it in the media compelled the Government through its policing powers to attempt an exercise in damage control.

When Mr. Kwame Baffoe was challenged several times by his interviewer as to the veracity of his assertions, he insisted that they were true and sought to justify the allegations on the interview which is now trending online. By failing or refusing to report former John

Mahama’s recruitment of Al Qaeda and Mr Barker-Vormawor to over-throw the government of Ghana by force of arms Mr Kwame Baffoe was committing the suspected offence of misprision treason under section 181 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29) which states that:

“181.    Misprision of treason

A person who knows the commission of high treason, or treason within the meaning of clause (17) of Article 19 of the Constitution, and does not forthwith reveal it to the President, or to a police officer not below the rank of Inspector, commits a misprision of treason and is punishable as a first-degree felony.”

Consequently, on February 15, 2022, the Ghana Police issued a public statement inviting Mr Kwame Baffoe to report to the police to assist in investigations into his allegations. He was arrested and detained overnight on the lesser charges of publication of false news, and offensive conduct conducive to breaches of the peace.

The detention overnight by the police of the Bono Regional Chairman of the governing party was so offensive to operatives of the governing party who openly expressed their disquiet leading to bail being facilitated for the suspect when he was brought before a court to be with his family while poor Barker- Vormawor, “the cockroach”, who made the mistake of making himself available in the den of “the fowls” administering the system of criminal justice administration received the justice cockroaches deserve before the executive branch of government run by “fowls”.

Mr Kwame Baffoe upon gaining his liberty took to the media to vent his spleen against the Inspector-General of Police and the Ghana Police Service for daring to humiliate him by his arrest and detention overnight.

The Inspector-General of Police and the Ghana Police Service have not dared to bring further charges against him for obstructing the police in the execution

of its law enforcement duties or for any other offence simply because he is a powerful regional chairman of the political party of the government in power.

The arrest and detention of Oliver Barker-Vormawor, the Convenor of #FixTheCountry and Mr Kwame Baffoe, the powerful Bono Regional Chairman of the governing political party, demonstrates the partiality with which the fundamental human rights and freedoms guaranteed to citizens might through the exercise of the investigatory and prosecutorial discretion in the system of criminal justice administration at the level of the executive branch of government has been wittingly or unwittingly abused in the matter of the “Kyei Mensah- Bonsu’s E-Levy cake for his 65^th birthday” contrary to Article 3(2) of the 1992 Constitution.

PROF. RAYMOND ATUGUBA’S PUBLIC LECTURE AND THE RESULTANT HYSTERIA ABOUT COUP MONGERING AND CALLING FOR HIS ARREST

On 28 February 2022, Prof. Raymond Atuguba, the Dean of the University of Ghana School of Law delivered a public lecture at the Erata Hotel under the auspices of Solidaire Ghana on the topic: “A Reviewed 1992 Constitution And Its Impact On The Economy of Ghana:

Looking Forward.” To prove the hypothesis of his public lecture he made references to the state of the national economy and how to prevent a coup in Ghana. One Saka Salia, reported in the media to be a Communication Team Member of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), called for the immediate arrest and investigation of Prof. Atuguba for advocating for a coup by his public lecture.

Mr Saka Salia charged the government to treat Prof. Atuguba the same way as the FixTheCountry convener, Mawuse Oliver Barker-Vormawor, who was arrested for similar comments. Mr Saka Salia is quoted to have stated, inter alia, that:

“The NDC are coup mongers and I will employ that Prof. Raymond Atuguba is arrested and investigated. If he is not, it will be considered discrimination. The Ghanaian community will start thinking some people are above the law which is wrong.”

The Minister of Information, Mr Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, devoted time to speak to journalists to criticise Prof. Atuguba’s public lecture. He is reported to have said, inter alia, that:

“Even if they were worse, the constitution provides legitimate means for advocating for and executing a change.

For respected persons to be purporting that such conditions legitimise coups is a terrible attack on our democracy itself and should not be condoned.”

Mr K. T. Hammond, an NPP Member of Parliament, joined the government hawks in calling for Prof. Atuguba’s arrest by the police for the exercise of his constitutional right to freedom of speech and of thought.

Mr Hammond is reported online to have said in an interview to the media, inter alia, that:

‘I will be surprised if they (police) have not already invited him, clear foolishness. I believe that the theory that has been brought up will be best explained to an assembly of national security apparatus. They will understand it better than where he took the opportunity to say these things. Coup does not resolve difficulties in any country, we should be careful.”

The electronic media also reported the interpretations and reactions of some leading members of the NDC to Prof. Atuguba’s lecture.

Dr Obed Asamaoh, a respected former Attorney General, without whose experience and practical abilities in a political organisation the NDC

would never have become a vibrant party capable of winning elections is reported to have allegedly described Prof. Atuguba’s statements on the ripeness of an environment for coups as “childish” and coming from someone who is not aware of the consequences of military takeovers.

The Speaker of Parliament, Mr Alban S.K. Bagbin was also reported by the media to have disagreed with the perspectives expressed by Prof. Atuguba in the public lecture without calling for his arrest.

But Dr. Obed Asamoah an eminent and experienced former Attorney-General, and former Minister of Foreign Affairs underscored the principles and conventions underlying the proper use of the investigatory and prosecutorial discretion of the executive branch of government when he politely concluded that:

“There is a difference between speech and action. [If I were the Attorney General] I will take action only when there is evidence of preparation to carry out a coup. If somebody is only talking, I will just take it to be over-excitement. I won’t go arresting people for that,”

In accordance with my usual work habit, I have critically read several times over the 21 pages published public lecture Prof. Atuguba delivered in which he analyzed the political and economic circumstances of Ghana and what must be done to avoid a coup in Ghana. I do not agree with some of the facts, analysis and conclusions Prof. Atuguba arrived at in his public lecture.

But from my considered critique and analysis of his lecture, I cannot find any ingredient of criminal incitement on the part of Prof. Atuguba of anybody to commit high treason, treason or treason felony or any criminal intention and act on his part to overthrow the elected Government of Ghana by force of arms or any unlawful means to warrant his arrest and detention.

Constitutionalism and democracy were undermined when the hawks in the governing party called for Prof. Atuguba’s arrest without first carefully and critically reading his full public lecture but merely relying on or listening to comments by social commentators who themselves might not have read or heard the full lecture delivered by the learned Professor. My conclusions are based on what Prof. Atuguba said within the context of his whole public lecture and not on hearsay, sentiments, and emotions.

At page 7 of the public lecture of Prof. Atuguba, he states that:

“We do not want a coup in this country. Yet I fear that if we do not act quickly, we may have one in our hands very soon…. I urge my good friend the Minister for National Security, Hon. Kan Dapaah, to have a conversation with my friend at the War College…. A big part of why certain coups succeed and others fail is the Economy. What is the state of our economy today?…”

Prof. Atuguba also stated at page 10, inter alia, that:

“Marching on the Office of the President, a National Security Zone, is not a crime. Saying that you will do the coup, using the definite article, a reference to the coup that the market women in Kumasi already say they will do, is a heinous crime.

Then at page 15 he states further that:

“…. There is only one thing to do now, prevent a Coup in Ghana, since the climate and the environment, national and immediate international, are conducive for one….”

On his concluding page on page 21 he makes, inter alia, the following statements:

“Canada of all places is clamping down on citizen demonstrations, and the United States

experienced their first attempted coup d’état in centuries in January last year. As for Africa, literally, every government is being toppled or sitting on tenterhooks…. The world cannot continue like this and Ghana, always the pacesetter must show the way….”

The foregoing sample of extracts from Prof. Atuguba’s public lecture taken within the context of the lecture does not disclose any intention on his part to commit any criminal offence let alone any act in fulfilment of his criminal intention.

I would not have referred to any relationship with Oliver Barker-Vormawor and the undignified conditions under which he is detained in such a lecture if I had researched, written and delivered the public lecture.

I would also have avoided the frontal comparison made between John Mahama’s government and the present government because of its potential to be misinterpreted as doing politics in such an important public lecture. But God did not create Prof. Atuguba to reason with my brains and socialization which explains why everyone is a unique social being resulting in Shakespeare saying that there are as many opinions as there are men. I am entitled to criticize Prof.

Atuguba as I have just done, just as Mr Bagbin and Dr Asamoah are reported to have done but none of us is entitled to gag Prof. Atuguba in the exercise of his fundamental right and freedom of speech and expression, and freedom of thought, conscience, and belief, which includes his academic freedom guaranteed to him under the 1992 Constitution as both a citizen of Ghana and a professor of laws.

CONCLUSIONS

This examination and analysis of the adversarial conflict over the Government’s E-Levy policy eventually deepening with the uncomplimentary public reaction to what some citizens perceived to be an opulent, arrogant, and insulting 65^th birthday celebration by the Majority Leader and Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, Mr Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu in February 2022 amid their sufferings and the government intention to further tax their scarce incomes has shown how discretionary investigatory and prosecutorial power vested in the executive branch of government can be abused in a manner inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the 1992 Constitution for purely unconstitutional partisan ends.

In George Orwell’s dystopia novel Nineteen Eight-Four, (1984) the Thought Police (Thinkpol) is the secret police of Oceania, which discovers and punishes thoughtcrime, personal and political thought unapproved by Ingsoc’s regime.

Thinkpol uses criminal psychology and omnipresent surveillance via informants, telescreens, cameras, microphones to monitor and arrest all those who have committed thoughtcrime in challenge to the status quo authority of the party and the regime of Big Brother.

The Government is using the Ghana Police now as its Thought Police in the E-Levy national disagreements to have its way despite the proscription of such unconstitutional methods under the 1992 Constitution as the foregoing article has demonstrated.

The unconstitutionality being inflicted upon citizens and political adversaries for alleged thought crimes for deciding not to be mere spectators but active citizens exercising their constitutional rights and freedoms can become pervasive and undermine the Constitution.

Therefore, real patriots must come together on a non-partisan basis and advocate against turning our democracy into a Big Brother regime and defend the 1992 Constitution by putting Ghana First!

Postscript/

I just read on www.myjoyonline.com that the Government is now objecting to the grant of bail to Oliver Barker-Vormawor, the #FixTheCountry lead convener who is not well because he will not be likely to appear to stand his trial as he has no fixed place of abode for a search warrant to be executed by the police by visiting and searching his residence and his refusal to obey a court order to grant the police access to his mobile phone. The application for bail has been adjourned to 14 March 2022 for a hearing.

Joy News reports that the provisional charge of treason felony for which he was unconstitutionally detained before being brought before a court is “over allegations that he has instigated members of his group to overthrow the government.”

Is the Government now fishing for the evidence to support the initial unconstitutional treason felony charge? Whatever it may be, this looks cynical at face value, but let us hold our horses and abide how this case pans out and whether #Fixthe Country and its convener will eventually be cancelled out as political adversaries of our Big Brother.

Readers who can find some time should re-visit my article on SIM card re-registration and integrate that material and conclusions with the use by Orwellian Thought Police (Thinkpol) of criminal psychology and omnipresent surveillance via informants, telescreens, cameras, microphones to monitor and arrest all those who have committed thoughtcrime in challenge to the status quo authority of the party and the regime of Big Brother.

The use of the Pegasus spyware I wrote about in that article makes one’s smartphone, iPad or computer and the SIM card used with them, surveillance devices modern Thinkpols employ for omnipresent surveillance as in the dystopian Big Brother Oceania.

Can the constitutional right against self-incrimination protect anybody any longer? Think about it and re-register your SIM card.

In his latest epistle, the former Attorney-General said the government creates an impression of being democratic, however, it is evident that President Akufo-Addo is running a self-styled “democratic-autocratic governance.”

According to him, the government seeks “cosmetic post facto consultation with relevant stakeholders only when there is a serious objection to the policy by the electorate and other stakeholders.

“The constitutional principles of probity, accountability, and transparency in governance are shamelessly contravened by a government that came to power only after representing to We the People that it would be the most accountable and transparent government ever to run the affairs of this country,” he noted.

Mr Amidu’s dispatch comes after Parliament on Friday, November 26, rejected the 2022 budget, which was presented by the Finance Minister, Ken Ofori-Atta, last week Wednesday.

The unprecedented incident came after the Majority in Parliament staged a walkout during the deliberation on the said budget.

The Majority has subsequently refused to admit that the budget has been thrown out.

According to the New Patriotic Party Caucus in the legislature, it was unconstitutional for Speaker Alban Bagbin to proceed with the hearing when they walked out of the Chamber.

However, in a rebuttal, the former Special Prosecutor noted that it will not be the first time deliberation on a policy before the House continued despite the absence of one caucus.

Citing the botched Agyapa Royalties Agreement, Mr Amidu said it was “hurriedly” approved even though the Minority in Parliament had staged a walkout, thus, were not present.

“The Agyapa Transaction Agreements, for instance, is an exemplified display of the arrogance and impunity of power by this government when it stuck to its position to complete the listing of Agyapa Royalties Limited on the London Stock Exchange by December 30, 2020, even after the most affected stakeholders, including the Chiefs as custodian of the nation’s lands, raised reasoned objections to the unaccountable and opaque manner the government obtained the parliamentary approval without prior consultations with the Chiefs and people.

“It was only over these damning objections that the government pretended to start consultations with stakeholders while insisting that the listing of the Agyapa Royalties Limited on the London Stock Exchange on or before the due date in December 2020 was not for negotiation. It had to take the Agyapa Royalties Anti-Corruption Risk Assessment Report and the audaciousness of a Special Prosecutor not to shelve the report for the government to swallow humble pie and save face by pretending to refer the Agreements for reconsideration by the Parliament that approved it,” he stressed.

Therefore, he believed that the level of stubbornness and failure to liaise with the opposition caused the rejection of the 2022 budget, making it the first economic policy to be rejected in the Fourth Republic.

According to him, the late former President exhibited the highest degree of integrity and honour in the management of the country’s public affairs for the common good of its ordinary citizens.

In his eulogy to the former President on the first anniversary of his death, the former Attorney General stated that the late Rawlings’ exploits could only be compared to British statesman Sir Winston Churchill.

“In terms of management skills in all facets of our governance as Head of State, including an in-depth understanding of the statecraft of our national and international relations, the life of the late President Emeritus Flt. Lt. Jerry John Rawling compares in our circumstances only to the late statesman and British Prime Minister, Sir Winston Churchill, who also did not have all those highfalutin certificates or university or college degrees,” he said.

He added: “It will take this country a long time for another President who understands the ordinary Ghanaian psyche and empathises truly with his compatriots to emerge to salvage our decaying democratic situation under the Constitution.”

Meanwhile, the former Special Prosecutor mentioned that despite the tremendous and many exploits of the late former President in his pursuit of accountability and probity, he was also human, thus, had faults of his own.

“He naturally had human weaknesses, and some of the actions taken under his leadership to restore the sanity and dignity of our decadent political system may have hurt others, and sometimes fatally,” he said.

He’s, however, convinced that despite his weaknesses and faults, his exploits overwhelmingly prevail.

“The facts are evidentially demonstrated by the extent to which those who had exhibited disdain to his regimes when he was in office as Ghana’s Head of State turned round to opportunistically assimilate and integrate his personality and successes into their regimes,” he said.

Mr Amidu, in his latest epistle, is certain that the executive arm of government led by President Nana Akufo-Addo was well apprised with the transaction.

He, therefore, believes the government is only using the ad-hoc Parliamentary Committee set up to investigate the murky deal as a façade to cover for the real culprits involved in the misconduct.

“From my experience working with President Akufo-Addo, I can bet my last pesewa that the report of the ad-hoc parliamentary committee on the Sputnik V – Covid-19 vaccine procurement was just a smokescreen behind which to exonerate and whitewash all the suspected unconstitutionalities and illegalities committed by the government in the procurement contract and payment for the vaccines.

“Ghanaians must be hallucinating to think that the Minister of Health, whom I have known since our Commonwealth Hall days in the 1970s, would have had the temerity to have executed the Sputnik Covid-19 procurement contract without executive approval by the Mother of the Government,” he noted.

MORE:

• Manasseh Azure Awuni: Andrew Amuna returns home, but not to stay

• My husband-to-be has stopped attending counselling because of what the pastor said

• Jamaican music star Popcaan to launch new album in Ghana

Calls for Mr Agyeman-Manu to resign have exceedingly increased following revelations in the report of the Parliamentary Committee that probed the Sputnik V vaccine contract.

The ad-hoc committee set up concluded that the government paid Dubai-based businessman Sheik Al–Maktoum ¢16 million for the vaccines despite claims by the Health Minister under oath that no money was paid.

But according to Mr Amidu, it was the Finance Minister, Ken Ofori-Atta who made the payment of ¢16 million without Parliamentary approval, thus, he should equally be held responsible for such malfeasance.

Citing the interview Mr Ofori-Atta granted the Norwegian journalist, Mr Amidu stressed that indeed, the executive had a hand in the controversial deal.

“In an earlier interview, the de facto co-President and Minister of Finance gave to a Norwegian journalist in June 2021 his language in response to the interrogatories from the Norwegian journalist was couched in terms of ‘the royal we’ – meaning he was speaking on behalf of the Akufo-Addo government.

“The reader may wish to affirm the facts and the authoritative pronouncements made by the co-President and Minister of Finance on behalf of the Ministry of Health, the Minister of Finance, and the Government as a collective,” a portion of his epistle read.

Speaking on JoyNews’ The Probe on Sunday, August 8, he said Mr Amidu has no evidence to back his claims.

“Where is the evidence?” he asked.

Mr Amidu, who was appointed by President Nana Akufo-Addo to serve as Ghana’s first Special Prosecutor resigned over allegations of interference by the government in his duties.

He further revealed that he had received various threats on his life following his findings on the ‘Agyapa’ deal.

In a subsequent release, Mr Amidu described President Akufo-Addo as the “mother serpent of corruption.”

Responding to a question by Host Emefa Apawu, Mr Mac Manu dismissed the allegations, describing them as “bogus”.

“I haven’t seen any interference because they were all bogus,” he said.

He further threw a challenge to the former Attorney-General to seek redress in court if indeed he has a case.

“We are in constitutionalism and nobody will go back into the era where soldiers ramped up people because they are corrupt.

“He is a lawyer and a former Attorney-General so he should know better that the courts are there to do justice.

“The rule of law must prevail, ” he added.

The former Attorney General, Mr Amidu was appointed to lead the fight against corruption for seven years, but nearly three years after he had been sworn into office, the Special Prosecutor (SP), resigned.

Mr Amidu cited what he described as “political interference in the independence of his office” as the main reason for his decision to leave office.

Additionally, he said, his office was given inadequate staff who were mostly on secondment, a situation that made it nearly impossible for his outfit to effectively carry out its functions.

On the 4th floor of the Jubilee House, President Akufo-Addo sworn into office 43-year-old legal practitioner, Kissi Agyabeng, for a seven-year mandate as Special Prosecutor.

Describing him as highly qualified, the President charged him to fight corruption independently.

“Kissi Agyabeng comes into office with the needed capacity, experience and values and I am very confident he will do a good job and we in the executive will respect the independence of his office and will provide the office with the needed support to enable him work efficiently,” he said.

The President also assured government will increase budgetary support to other anti-corruption institution to help with the fight against the canker.

Kissi Agyabeng

Mr Agyabeng takes office as the second special prosecutor.

According to his profile on the University of Ghana School Of Law website, Mr Agyabeng has been a lecturer since October 2006, teaching and researching Criminal Law, International Humanitarian Law, International Law, Corporate Law and Legal Research and Writing.

He was awarded the Bentsi-Enchill Prize for Best Graduating Student of the University Of Ghana School Of Law in 2001.

He proceeded to the Ghana School of Law and was called to the Ghana Bar in October 2003, earning the E.N. Sowah Memorial Prize for Best Student in Family Law.

Since then, he has successfully argued numerous cases before the superior courts of Ghana and participated in several international arbitration hearings.

Mr Agyebeng has a wide range of expertise in consulting for public sector institutions, including the A-G’s Department, EXIM Bank Ghana Ltd, the Youth Employment Authority, the National Lottery Authority, the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation, the Ghana Trade Fair Company Limited and the Ghana Olympic Committee.

He is also an associate at the African Centre for Cyber Law and Cyber Crime Prevention and the National Moot Court Coordinator for the Commonwealth Moot Court Competition on International Criminal Justice.

He has also served as the Vice-Chairman of the Appeals Committee of the Ghana Football Association.

About the Office of the special Prosecutor

The Office of the Special Prosecutor of Ghana was established after an act of the Parliament of Ghana passed the Office of Special Prosecutor Bill in 2017.[1]

The office serves as an independent investigating and prosecution body to make inquiries into corruption, bribery, or other criminal cases at the national level whether they be in public or private sector.

In his latest epistle, the former Attorney General alleged that Madam Akuffo and Director of Public Prosecution, Yvonne Attakora Obuobisa, after perusing the police docket came to the conclusion that some of the suspects should be charged.

“The credible information I received on the case is and was that the then-Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions had both perused the case docket and had come to the conclusion that charges be filed against some of the suspects for prosecution.

“The Attorney General was instructed not to do so by the President who unconstitutionally usurped the investigatory and prosecutorial constitutional authority of the Attorney General on the grounds of political expediency of having the suspects agreeable to play ball in Parliament for government,” he alleged.

It emerged in 2018 that some Members of Parliament (MPs), who served as ministers in the Mahama administration, allegedly received double salaries.

MORE:

• Michy causes stir after flaunting her new ‘baby’ [Photos]

• Video of Adjetey Anang ‘flirting’ with Jackie Appiah pops up; fans react

• New twist to NPP Women’s Organiser’s burnt mining equipment

The police said the alleged action by the MPs “is contrary to Section 124 (1) of the Criminal and other Offences Act 1960 (Act 29), as amended in 2012, Act 849.  Section 124 relates to the offence of stealing.”

Media reports showed that many ministers who served under former President John Mahama took double salaries for four years, while others received double salaries for two and three years, probably because they were reshuffled.

In 2012, four of the ministers took double salaries and are currently not serving in Parliament, but by 2013 the double-salaried appointees had increased to 22, while in 2014 about 18 were said to be involved.

In 2015 and 2016, 15 and 12 appointees took double salaries, respectively.

From 2012 to 2016 when the NDC was in office, some of the appointees were captured in all the data collated as having received double salaries.

The list showed that the appointees received double salaries at least once a month, while others received them monthly throughout the years.

Initially, 25 NDC MPs were said to have been invited by the CID, but the then-Minority in Parliament held a press conference on Tuesday, April 10, 2018, to debunk the allegation.

Lame duck Amidu

Mr Amidu claims there has been a reportage in some sections of the media alleging it was his failure to deal with the matter that had resulted in non-prosecution of the MPs.

But, he insists that while in office, he never dealt with the double salary matter.

The lawmaker was standing trial over alleged procurement breaches in an ambulance purchase.

Mr Ayariga, together with six others, were charged by the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) for contravening the procurement Act.

It was the first corruption case filed by the OSP.

Graphic Online reports that the seven were, however, acquitted and discharged on Friday, May 7, 2021, by the High Court, presided over by Justice Afia Serwah Asare–Botwe, after it upheld a submission of no case filed by the defence lawyers.

The accused persons were represented by lawyer Godwin Edudzi Tamakloe.

ALSO READ:

• Amidu sues Mahama Ayariga over tax, duty evasion

• Why Speaker released Mahama Ayariga to face trial

The MP and six others, including the current Municipal Chief Executive for Bawku, Hajia  Ninchema, were in court for allegedly engaging in procurement breaches.

The seven accused persons were facing seven counts of conspiracy, abetment, contravention of the procedure for request for quotation, using public office for profit and transfer of foreign exchange from Ghana through an unauthorised dealer.

They pleaded not guilty to all the charges.

The seven are alleged to have acted together to import an ambulance without following due procurement process, as stipulated by law.

Mr Ofori-Atta has explained he was there to visit Mr Amidu who was indisposed at the time.

According to him, he was in Mr Amidu’s office on a Friday where he found out he was not available because he was not feeling well.

“I only visited Amidu because I heard he was unwell and also to provide him with information on the Agyapa deal; a gesture misinterpreted by the citizen vigilante,” he clarified before the Appointments Committee of Parliament on Friday.

Mr Amidu, in an interview on Accra-based Citi FM, disclosed the former was in his house on 21 October 2020.

“The fact that you are in government doesn’t mean that when you are dissatisfied about a report, you go after the person or the fellow,” he said, revealing: “The Minister of Finance has been my friend for years; why will I go for him? When I was writing the report, didn’t he come to this house? Was he not here on 21 October? What did I tell him? Why is he now churning our information about me and targets and all that? Should I come out? Let’s stop it and I say let’s stop it before we wash dirty linen in public,” he bemoaned.

ALSO READ:

• Ofori-Atta was in my house while I wrote Agyapa report – Amidu

• Akufo-Addo directed me not to take any further steps on Agyapa deal – Martin…

Mr Ofori-Atta further argued Mr Amidu was an independent man who could not be influenced in anyway.

“On Saturday, I went to visit him and to provide him with some pieces of information he said he wasn’t getting from us [the Ministry of Finance].

“But I think we all know Mr Amidu is a very independent person, and so I didn’t visit him to attempt to change his view on his investigations,” he said.