Posted on: www.dailyguideghana.com
By William Yaw Owusu
Friday, September 30, 2016
The Commission on Human
Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) has established that President John
Dramani Mahama breached the gift policy of the state when he accepted a Ford
Expedition vehicle gift from a Burkinabe contractor.
The CHRAJ, in its 78-page
report released late Wednesday said, “The Commission is satisfied that the gift
in question forms part of gifts prohibited under the Gift Policy under the Code
of Conduct. Although the evidence shows that the Respondent subsequently
surrendered the gift to the State, the action nonetheless contravened the gift
policy.”
When Mr Mahama was the vice president
during the tenure of former President John Evans Atta Mills, he took delivery
of a brand new 2010 Ford Expedition in 2010 from Djibril Kanazoe, whose company
had since been awarded juicy government contracts, including the construction
of the controversial $650,000 Ghana Embassy fence wall in Burkina Faso - apart
from other multi-million dollar contracts, since his encounter with President
Mahama.
The Burkinabe contractor sent the gift, believed to be worth $100,000,
to his friend, Mr. Mahama, through the Ghana Embassy in Ouagadougou and the transaction
had been concealed for about four years until its lid was blown by journalist
Manasseh Awuni Azure of Joy FM.
Three petitions had been filed separately by the National Youth
League of the Convention People’s Party (CPP), a private citizen, Nana Adofo
Ofori, as well as Dr. Papa Kwesi Nduom’s Progressive People’s Party (PPP), all
citing President Mahama as having received bribe and indulging in conflict of
interest.
Issues Set Out
According to CHRAJ, it set out 13 issues for investigation into
the matter before concluding that the president did not put himself in any
conflict of interest situation.
The commission explained in
the report that although President Mahama ‘contravened’ the Gift Policy of the
state, there was no ‘conflict of interest’ on the part of the president as
raised by the petitioners.
“At the end of the preliminary investigation, CHRAJ
has come to the conclusion, based on the extensive evidence assembled that the allegations
that the Respondent has contravened Article 284 of the 1992 Constitution by
putting himself in situations of conflict of interest have not been
substantiated. Consequently, the Commission holds that full or further
investigations into the allegations are not warranted. The allegations,
therefore, are hereby dismissed.”
Presidential Pool
CHRAJ said there was evidence
that when the president took delivery of the said vehicle, he handed it over to
the state and the vehicle was included in the presidential pool on November 2,
2012 and therefore the action cured any charge of conflict of interest against him
(president).
“Having reviewed the evidence
on the actions and conduct of the Respondent after the gift was made, the
Commission is satisfied that his actions and conduct sufficiently dealt with
any conflict of interest that could have been occasioned. In the circumstances,
the Commission finds that the Respondent did not put himself in a conflict of
interest situation or contravene the conflict of interest rules under Article
284 of the 1992 Constitution.
The document, signed by
Acting CHRAJ Commissioner Richard Quayson, indicated that “the Commission
accordingly finds that the circumstances under which the gift was delivered to
the Respondent, and conduct of the Respondent after the gift was made
sufficiently rebuts the presumption of acceptance of a bribe by a public
officer,” CHRAJ posited, adding, “In the circumstances, the Commission is
satisfied that the Respondent’s conduct did not violate Article 284 of the 1992
Constitution of Ghana.”
Prohibited Gift
Interestingly, CHRAJ held
that the gift in question formed part of gifts prohibited by the Gift Policy
under the Code of Conduct and added that although the evidence showed that
President Mahama subsequently surrendered the gift to the State, the action
nonetheless contravened the gift policy.
“The Commission is satisfied
with the actions of the Respondent after the gift was made, and accordingly
finds that his conduct was not consistent with that of a person who had been
corrupted by a gift or improperly influenced by same.
“On the basis of the
available evidence, the Commission finds clearly stated on the face of the
Customs Temporary Vehicle Importation permission duly stamped and signed by
Customs officials, the name of Ouedraogo Cheick Mohammed as the owner/driver
and therefore finds the allegation of the perpetration of fraud on Ghanaians on
the part of the Respondent totally misconceived and unsupported by the
evidence.”
Contracts Influenced
CHRAJ said there was no
evidence that the gift to the president influenced the award of contracts to
the person who had offered it and added that all the contracts given to Djibril
Kanazoe duly passed through procurement processes.
“At the end of the preliminary investigation,
the Commission has come to the conclusion, based on the extensive evidence
assembled that the allegations that the Respondent has contravened Article 284
of the 1992 Constitution by putting himself in situations of conflict of
interest have not been substantiated. Consequently, the Commission holds that
full or further investigations into the allegations are not warranted.
The allegations, therefore,
are hereby dismissed.”
Lawyer Reacts
Reacting to the CHRAJ ruling, Tony Lithur, lawyer
for President Mahama, lauded the Commission’s decision.
“I commend CHRAJ for discharging its constitutional
mandate with dispatch, and hope that the clarity and completeness of its
determination of all the issues will finally lay this matter to rest once and
for all,” he said in a statement.
No comments:
Post a Comment