If The Allegations Against Amidu In The 9-Page-Response Is Anything To Go By

The Former Special Prosecutor and Attorney General has got a lot of internal wrangling with the government of day. The question of independence and freedom of actions, Accommodation, Emoluments, Recruitment and the emergence of a secondment to make for vacancy, all adds up to the justification of the internal wrangling, if the 9-page-response from the Office of the President, is anything to go by.

I suppose Mr. Amidu has got a track record of some of this bickering, be it; internally or externally as far back as he started off his political career with Flt. Jerry John Rawlings’ PNDC. I would not want to discount his good relationship with Rawlings. However, if my memory could serve me right, Mr. Amidu was sacked from Office as an Attorney General in the erstwhile Atta-Mills-led administration for an alleged misconduct (ie. He was alleged to have attempted beating the then President Mills). If Mr. Amidu’s purported conduct with respect to the 9 page reply from the Office of the President through to the Secretary to the President, is anything to go by, then; his personality has got a bad reputation and he has still got enough time to make amends.

This piece will juxtapose the letter of resignation of appointment as Special Prosecutor addressed to the president with the 9 page reply to the allegations thereof.

With respect to the issue of independence and freedom of actions of the Office of the Special Prosecutor, I would be careful to crave your indulgence to the sharp contrasts between the Resignation letter addressed to the President dated November 16, 2020 with reference number (OSP/2/AM/14) and the Reply to his allegations therein, dated Tuesday November 17, 2020 with reference number (OPS 126/20/2362).

“This one condition upon which I accepted to be nominated as Special Prosecutor when you invited me to your office on 10th January 2018, was your firm promise to me that you’ll respect and ensure same by your government for my independence and freedom of actions as the Special Prosecutor. Several things have happened since then. But your reaction to my letter with reference number (OSP/SCR/20/12/20) dated 16th October 2020 which was delivered to you on 19th October 2020 conveying to you the conclusions and observations of the analysis of the risk of corruption and anti-corruption assessment of the Agyapa royalties limited Transaction convinces me beyond every reasonable doubt that you had laboured under the mistaken belief that I hold the office of the Special Prosecutor as your poodle,” an excerpt of the resignation letter from Mr. Amidu asserted.

Meanwhile, an excerpt of the 9 page reply to the allegations stated with no shadow of doubt that “Again, in a recent 3 august 2020 letter (OSP/SCR/24/33/20) from you to the Chief of Staff at the office of the President, you stated, in part, as follows; I’ve remained in this office this long, out of the personal respect for the President’s shared commitment with me to fight corruption.”

“It is baffling that you present a summary report of work, not commissioned by the President held with you is perplexing. In exercise of what you considered to be your powers under Act 959, you had voluntarily proceeded to present the Agyapa Report. The president had no hand in your work. Without prompting from any quarter within the Executive, you delivered a letter purporting to be a copy of your report to the President.

The purpose of presenting a copy of Agyapa Report to the President is decipherable from paragraph 32 of your letter to the President in which you indicate that you hoped the Report will be ” used to improve current and future legislative and executive actions to make corruption and other corruption-related offences a very high risk enterprise in Ghana,” the statement added.

On another breadth, paragraph 5 of Mr. Amidu’s resignation letter stated “I met Your excellency in your office in the afternoon of 23rd October 2020 and I underscored the fact that my letter dated 16th October, 2020 to you was sent out of the necessary courtesy of prior information to your office as President of the republic of Ghana and the commander-in-chief responsible for national security. I also understand the fact that the analysis of the risk of corruption and anti-corruption assessment was conducted professionally, it could not be reviewed by the Finance minister and yourself and my letter was not particularly intended for you to direct me as to how to conduct the duties of my office. Your excellency insisted that I should withhold any further action on the report for a week. I reluctantly agreed to your terms but gave you notice immediately that I do not intend to continue as the special Prosecutor because of your interference in the performance of my functions under the law. “

In any case, the purported 3 August 2020 letter with reference number (OSP/SCR/24/33/20) goes a long way to provide justifiable reasons as to why H.E the President had directed Mr. Amidu, not to do any further report on the Agyapa deal until his return from a tour in the Volta region, through the Chief of staff.

The reason being that, a fragment of his [Martin Amidu] recent letter dated August 3, 2020 maintained categorically that “I’ve remained in this office this long out of the personal respect for the president’s shared commitment with me to fight corruption.”

Meanwhile, Article 58(1) confers on the President an injunction to further take actions and make enquiries as far as his executive discretionary powers are concerned.

However, the same article (ie. Article 58(3) ) stipulates that “Subject to the provision of this constitution, the functions conferred on the President by clause(1) of this article may be exercised by him either directly or through officers subordinate to him.”

Ostensibly, the question of the “shared commitment” as mentioned by Mr. Amidu could linger on even if he is on an assignment but either directly or through his subordinate (ie. Chief Of Staff)

From where I sit, what I make of the President’s directive through to Mr. Amidu is a palpable breach of the constitution.

The two purported statements on accommodation has also seen a sharp contrast. In a bid to explain how he [Amidu] was compelled to use the said three bedroom and boys quarters with the seconded staff deployed, an excerpt from his resignation letter reads “the compulsion to use a limited number of seconded staff in a three bedroom and boys quarters accommodation undermine the achievement of the objects of the office and my undertaking of an oath by parliament.”

The 23rd statement refutes these assertions by way of establishing facts and figures allocated for the Housing of the Office of the Special Prosecutor. The statement reads “You sought to blame the housing of the Office of the Special Prosecutor in a three bedroom and boys quarters accommodation on Government. Once again, the facts do not bear out your assertions and insinuations. It is evident that responsibility for this situation can be attributable only to your good self. Your office rejected various allocations of suitable accommodation with the result that you remained at your present accommodation by choice and not some grand design by government to ensure your office didn’t function as it should.”

With inference to the subsequent facts backing his outright rejection of the allocation of suitable accommodation by Government, I am of the view that, Mr. Amidu was pretty much indecisive as to which office to reside and literally wasted resources incurred during the renovation exercises.

If the all of this statements are anything to go by, then; the former prosecutor has actually caused a colossal, financial loss to the Ministry of Works and Housing and thus, the state.

Another thorny issue if the 9 page report from the Office of the President, is anything to go by, is the question of emoluments and the secondment deployed by both the Ministry of Interior and Controller and Accountant General’s Department.

“With respect to the allegations from the Former Special prosecutor as part of his Resignation letter on Emoluments and secondment, he indicated that “It is essential for me to state for the records and contrary to public perceptions, that my appointment letter was received on 5th February 2020 (almost two years after my appointment). The copy addresses made no efforts to honour any of the conditions of appointment in terms of Emoluments and benefits of appointment ever since my warrant of appointment was issued on 23rd February 2018 to the date of this letter of resignation.”

“One cannot seriously prevent and fight corruption by depending on seconded staff of (two year duration renewable another year) who are looking forward to/and or over their shoulders to returning to their main employers who consistently may have more influence on them than the special Prosecutor under whom they whom they are supposed to work,” Mr. Amidu’s letter of resignation added.

On the contrary, paragraph 18 of the 9 page response from the Office of the President, made deep revelations on the back of the statement regarding his [Martin Amidu] denial of the emoluments due him and his Deputy.

” In 2020, the approved budget for your office was GHC 188,804,732.00 out of which GHC 39,325,597.17 has so far been released consisting of GHC 36,232,522.00 for compensation of employees. Curiously, your office has not accessed the amount on GIFMIS, the Government’s payment platform. Your office has so far spent only GHC 308,75. Taking account of the amount that was rolled over from the year 2019, the account of the Special Prosecutor at the Bank of Ghana, as at 12th November 2020 shows a balance of GHC 60.47 million,” the statement declared.

I am of the opinion that, the Former Special Prosecutor was acting under the disguise of sheer greed, if the 9 page reply from the Office of the President, is anything to go by. Part of the statement recounted how he [Martin Amidu] submitted a budget proposal as of 2018 and a reasonable half of the amount proposed was dispatched to his Office, which is still left untapped and unaccounted for.

In a related development, the statement added that a compensation budgetary allocation turned out untapped due to the inability of the Office to recruit the expected 249 staffs.

“Information available to the office of the President indicates that only two persons were recruited by your office and that the rest of the staff of the office are on secondment from the Ministry of interior and the controller and accountant general department.”

Interestingly, unemployed graduates in the field could be left home due to the sheer incompetence of the head of the Office of the Special Prosecutor.

In spite of the fact that the budgetary allocation was not misappropriated, he acted as though, he was not privy to recruitment and the running of a Public Office and thus the much-touted Public Purse.

At this juncture, I would say that the misconduct of the Former Special Prosecutor, lending credence to the 9-page response, speaks volumes for Mr Martin Amidu being a square peg in a round hole!

The Writer is a Student Journalist at the Ghana Institute Of Journalism.

https://jerrymozillaa.wordpress.com/2020/11/18/jerr-avornyotse-writes-if-the-allegations-against-amidu-in-the-9-page-response-is-anything-to-go-by/