The Labour Party LP and its presidential candidate in the February 25 election, Mr Peter Gregory Obi have filed a petition before the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal in Abuja challenging the Independent National Electoral Commission’s declaration of Bola Ahmed Tinubu of the All Progressive Congress, APC, as the winner of the election.
Obi and LP are praying the court to hold that at the time of the Presidential election held on 25th February 2023 Tinubu and Kashim Shettima were not qualified to contest the election.
In the petition predicated mainly on the alleged double nomination, the Petitioners are asking the tribunal to declare all the votes recorded for Tinubu in the election as wasted votes owing to the non-qualification of Tinubu and Shetima.
They want the petition to be determined on the basis of the remaining votes after discountenancing the votes credited to Tinubu, the 1st petitioner, Peter Obi scored a majority of the lawful votes cast at the election and had nothing less than 25 percent in each of at least 2/3 of the states of the federation and the Federal Capital Territory Abuja and satisfied the constitutional requirements to be declared the winner of 25th February 2023 Presidential Election.
They also contended that Tinubuit having failed to score one-quarter of the votes cast at the Presidential election in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja was not entitled to be declared and returned as the winner of the presidential election held on Saturday, February 25, 2023.
It will be recalled that the Independent National Electoral Commission INEC Chairman, Prof Mahmud Yakubu had on March 1 declared Tinubu president-elect on the grounds that he polled 8,805,835 votes.
Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party, had 6,984,640 votes while Obi was said to have scored 6,984,640 votes.
But Obi and Atiku had called for the cancellation of the results, alleging malpractice following the electoral umpire’s failure to electronically upload results immediately from its polling units to the INEC Results Viewing Portal.
Based on the Electoral Act, aggrieved contestants have 21 days from the day of the election results announcement to fill their petitions.
The Ghana Union of Traders’ Association (GUTA) has shared in the pains of traders whose goods and properties worth millions of Ghana cedis were burnt in last Wednesday’s fire outbreak at the Kejetia market in Kumasi.
The fire, which burnt 33 shops and affected 17 others at a section of the newly built €248 million Kejetia market, started when a trader was cooking with gas in a shop, the Ghana National Fire Service has established.
Investigations by the Fire Service also indicated that the shop was near other shops where turpentine, gunpowder and other combustibles were sold, resulting in an explosion when the fire started.
This is the second time a major fire disaster has occurred at the Kejetia market (Kumasi Central Market), following a May 11, 2021 fire outbreak also affecting some parts of the market.
“The Ghana Union of Traders’ Associations wish to express its heartfelt sympathy to all traders whose wares and properties estimated at millions of Ghana Cedis were lost to the inferno that gutted Kejetia Market in Kumasi,” it said in a press statement.
The statement, issued by the President of GUTA, Dr Joseph Obeng and copied to the Ghana News Agency said it was happy to learn that no one died from the fire outbreak.
The Association called for stronger police oversight in all markets across the country and said repeated fire outbreaks at both old and new markets had alarmed them.
It stated that the situation was heartbreaking and needed to be addressed because it was consuming a significant portion of their financial resources and reducing trader income and productivity.
“Effective policing of the markets by the authorities will be the best way to ensure safety and security of the marketplaces rather than only collecting levies and leaving traders to their fate,” the Association said.
On insurance, the Association said it was engaging some insurance companies to start providing policies for members of the trading community in the markets based on a memorandum of understanding that would be beneficial to all in the event of such unforeseen calamities.
Vice President Dr Mahamudu Bawumia paid a visit to the Kejetia market on Monday and expressed sympathy to the affected traders on behalf of the government.
He assured the traders that the Government would provide the necessary funding to rebuild the damaged area of the market but asked them to abide by safety regulations to stop any such fire outbreaks.
The authorities have also announced that the Kejetia Market would resume for business on Tuesday, March 21, at the areas that were not affected by the fire.
Julius Ayivor, a lead team member of the Receiver, has testified before an Accra High Court that proposals submitted by entities under Beige Group Limited were very insulting.
According to him, despite these entities owing monies running into millions of Ghana cedis, some of them proposed to make monthly payments of GH¢500.00.
Testifying as the prosecution first witness, he said the entities’ proposals were in response to a letter addressed to them in relation to funds advanced to them by Beige Bank.
Mr. Ayivor told the court, presided over by a Court of Appeal Judge with additional responsibility of the High Court, on Monday: “Some indicated their willingness to pay their debts owed to Beige Bank. However, the proposals they submitted were very insulting, because some of them proposed to pay monthly amount of, some instances, GH¢500 for a debt that is in millions.”
This response landed him a follow-up question from Thaddeus Sory, Counsel for Michael Nyimaku, former Beige Group of Companies Chief Executive Officer (CEO), while cross-examining him.
The Counsel asked the witness how much the Receiver indicated was less insulting to him to enable these entities make better proposals, but Mr. Ayivor could not give a definite answer, saying: “I will need to go back and check if there were any formal proposals to this.
The Counsel, in furtherance to the answer, wanted to find out from the witness whether he would be in the position to tell the court, which of the entities wrote back to the Receiver and made the insulting proposal, and this time around also the witness insisted that he needed to go back and check.
Beige Bank acquiring equity shares in FASL
The former President of the Ghana Journalists Association, Gifty Afenyi-Dadzie, and her husband, Kwesi Tetteh Dadzie, also cropped up in the trial.
The couples’ names were mentioned in connection with Beige Bank’s expression of interest to acquire equity shares in First Africa Savings and Loans (FASL), of which the duo were members of the Board of Directors.
The Dadzies had opened an account with Beige Bank bearing their signatures, but the Receiver later discovered that there was another alleged fictitious account with the signature card of two additional signatories of officers of the Beige Bank – Vanessa Akofa Atsu and Yvonne Phillips.
However, when Mr. Sory suggested that the FASL Managing Director wrote to Beige Bank to confirm the change in signatories because, the Beige Group had invested in equity shares of FASL the witness said he could not confirm that information for a fact.
The witness explained that for FASL to be able to operate a corporate account, it needed a Board resolution, and without it could not have opened one in the name of the company.
He told the court that FASL, through a Board resolution, opened an account ending with 121, but later another account ending with 122, without the Board’s approval, was opened, hence, it was illegal and fictitious.
“If it was, indeed, a regular account, there should have been a resolution of the Board of Directors of FASL instructing that account to be opened in their name, without which that account can only be described as illegitimate and fictitious.
And my lady, you can confirm that proceeds of… GH¢320 million were transferred from their accounts to that fictitious account. Out of it, the accused instructed [that] various payments, totally about Gh¢21 million, be paid out to companies owned and controlled by him, to the detriment of the affected customer. And it is contained in paragraph 22 of my witness statement,” he added.
The witness added that at the time of FASL’s revocation of license, it had about only GH¢12 million in its account with the Beige Bank.
All along the witness had testified that Beige Group, through its subsidiary Beige Capital and Asset Management (BCAM), siphoned depositors’ funds into a fictitious account with FASL.
When asked by the Counsel whether the Receiver engaged the Dadzies on the matter, he responded that personally, he didn’t, but he was aware a special investigation team (SIT) that was established to investigate cases relating to the collapse of Beige Bank had various discussions with persons associated with the matter under discussion, including Gifty Afenyi-Dadzie.
Accusation
The former CEO of the Beige Group Limited, Michael Nyimaku, has been charged with 43 charges of stealing, fraudulent breach of trust and money laundering.
The accused pleaded not guilty and was granted bail in the sum of GH¢200 million, with three sureties.
The case has been adjourned to March 27, 2023.
Cross-examination
Q: The letter, Exhibit 6, deals with the payments, which you have testified about in Paragraph 25 of your witness statement. Is that correct?
A: That’s so my lady, however, Paragraph 25 of my witness statement deals with some of the payments that are contained in Exhibit 6.
Q: Is there any of the payments in Paragraph 25 of your witness statements that is not reflected in Exhibit 6?
A: My lady, as far as I’m aware, the payment in Paragraph 25 in my witness statements are contained in Exhibit 6. I will, however, have to check the appendixes to Exhibit 6 against the details of the payment on Paragraph 25 to confirm whether there are any transactions in Paragraph 25 that are not contained in Exhibit 6.
Q: Exhibit 6 and Paragraph 25 of your witness statements are both before you, is that correct?
A: That’s so my lady.
Q: If you look at Exhibit 6, what it says that the Receiver has noted the transaction payments and advances on behalf of directors and shareholders in relation to parties to the banks, as well as their total outstanding balance?
A: That’s so.
Q: The Receiver also assessed the interest as extracted from the bank’s records…?
A: That’s not entirely so; what the Receiver stated was that the outstanding balance, together with interest, as extracted from the bank’s records on one hand, or as computed by him using the bank’s base rate, equaled about GH¢1.2 million. My lady, and that is because for some of the balances that are contained on exhibits related to party loans totally GH¢501 million, had interest of GH¢356 million that was extracted from the bank’s records.
However, balances related to directors, shareholders and prepayment project works totaling in excess of GH¢400 million also have an interest component, which was computed by the Receiver. And that is because those monies were siphoned out to the benefit of the accused.
There was no Board approval in respect of those payments. There was also no agreement between the banks and the beneficiaries of those funds to ensure that the amount the Board of Directors refunded to the bank is at arm’s length.
The Receiver needs to include an interest component, as there was no … known from the date when those payments were made to the date when the bank’s license was revoked.
Q. Since there is no free money, it was the reason the bank recorded all of these transactions that you testified about in Paragraph 25 of your witness statement, and from which the Receiver extracted?
A. That is so, and it is very normal for such transactions to be recorded. If they were not recorded in the books of the bank it would not have balanced. Recording those transactions gives anyone reviewing the record information about the nature of those transactions, when combined with other supporting documentation.
Q: That supporting documentation will still be with the bank. Correct?
A: That’s so, and there could be other supporting documentation external to the bank.
Q: Still with Exhibit 6; right under the table the Receiver informs the accused person that by virtue of Exhibit 6, he was formally demanding a repayment of all of those funds you mentioned in Paragraph 25 of your witness statements from the accused?
A. That is so, and that is because the Receiver’s mandate, as prescribed under Act 930, includes recovering debts owed the bank that could be made about those legitimately advanced by the bank, and those illegitimately siphoned out of the bank, so this paragraph is just indulgent of those mandates.
Q. Are you aware that under Act 930, it is not illegal for … to expose itself to a legal third party?
A. I’m aware that a bank can be exposed to related parties to some extent. There is a cap that is allowed under the Act.
Q Throughout your witness statement, you have not indicated whether the cap was exceeded?
A. Not explicitly.
Q. In Exhibit 6, the Receiver expressly told the accused if he fails to pay the funds the Receiver will treat him as defaulingt in Paragraph 25?
A. That’s so. In default with the content of the demand being made for a return of those funds.
Q. It is a letter signed by the accused?
A. That’s so.
Q. It is written to the Receiver of the bank?
A. That is also so.
The Counsel tendered the document through the accused. It is a document dated March 22, 2019, [and] addresses to the Receiver.
Q. That letter is clearly headed ‘demand to issue individual credit letters’?
A. That’s so. In addition to that, it also said exposure of the Beige Group.
Q. And in addition to your answer, the letter reminds the Receiver of the need to issue individual demand notices to each of the institutions connected to the Beige Group, which have exposures to the bank?
A. That’s so.
Q. The accused goes on to say in the letter that he has alerted most of them, and he can confirm that they are waiting [for] action from the Receiver?
A. That’s so.
Q. The accused finally tells the Receiver that he should kindly do it; write to the individuals concerned so [the] accused and the Receiver can make progress?
A. That’s so. Exhibit 7 relates to exposures of entities related to Beige Bank in connection with various facilities advanced by the bank to them. My lady, you will mostly find the outstanding balance of those facilities in Appendix 5, described as Reference 5 on page 10 of Exhibits 6.
There are 12 related parties indicated on that appendix and their balance totaling GH¢501 million. These exposures related to Beige Bank, and they are different from the GH¢281 million stated in Paragraph 25 of my witness statement. Indeed, the Receiver did make direct demands on the related parties, indicated on Page 10 of Exhibit 6, to repay the amounts advanced to them by Beige Bank, which are entirely different from the matter under discussion in Paragraph 25 of my witness statements.
Q. Page 6, it is clearly titled ‘Exposure to Beige Group’?
A. There is a demand notice also part of that. The title is ‘Demand notice and exposure of Beige Group of Companies’.
Q. If you look at Exhibit 7, it’s clear that the letter the accused wrote to the Receiver relates to the exposure to the Beige Group of Companies?
A. That’s so. It is clear from the reading of the title that it is exposure of the Beige Group, and my lady, the Beige Group is a separate legal entity wholly owned by the accused.
Q. Now, in your testimony before this court this morning, you confirm that the entities specify in Exhibit 6, include all the entities you mention in your Paragraph 25 and more. I’m putting that to you?
A. That’s not so. What I stated was that the transactions, that is the individual transactions that make up to GH¢281 million in Paragraph 25 of my witness statements, would be contained in the individual transactions that make up about the GH¢1.2 million of Exhibit 6. In fact, they will just be related to the first four categories stated in Exhibit 6, which are directors’ account, shareholders of Beige Group account, and payment of project works account.
Q. You also testified that the Receiver wrote to the entities in reference 5 of appendix 1 of Exhibit 6?
A. That’s so. As far as my memory serves me right they were written to
Q. Did they respond?
A. Some responded.
Q. Are you able to tell what some of them said?
A. Some indicated their willingness to pay their debts owed Beige Bank. However, the proposals they submitted were very insulting, because some of them proposed to pay monthly amounts, in some instances GH¢500, for a debt that is in millions.
Q. Did the Receiver indicate the less insulting to enable these entities make better proposals to him?
A. I will need to go back and check if there were any formal proposals to this?
Q. Are you able to tell the court which of these relates to parties that wrote back to the Receiver and made insulting proposals?
A. I will need to go and check.
(The court orders the witness to produce copies of responses on Monday)
Q. Show him this document, it is a letter written from the accused to the Receiver?
A: Yes.
Q. Surely, to the Receiver on May 7, 2019?
A. That’s so.
Counsel: We want to tender in the document.
Prosecution: No objection.
Court: The document is a letter addressed to the Receiver, dated May 6, 2019, and it has a certain attachment on refurbishment etc.
Q. Now, if you take a look at Exhibit 8, the last paragraph on the first page, the accused informed the Receiver that the bank undertook steps to rebrand as a result of the Bank of Ghana upgraded its license?
A. That’s so; what the accused person claimed.
Q. Go to Paragraph 17 of your witness statement. In that paragraph of your witness statement, you testified that the Beige Group expressed interest in investing in FASL?
A. That’s so, in the equity shares of FASL.
Q. Did they, the Beige Group, actually invest in FASL?
A. I don’t know that for a fact.
Q. FASL is in receivership, correct?
A. That’s so.
Q. And the Receiver of the Beige Bank is also the Receiver of FASL?
A. That’s not correct.
Q: Your testimony to this court confirms that at a point FASL wrote to change their signatories?
A. That’s so. They wrote to update the signatories of the one account that they opened with Beige Bank, and that account is No. 0381520414121.
Q. That is the subject matter to your testimony; is Exhibit E?
A. If I may call for Exhibit E. That’s so.
Q. Now, in Exhibit E, FASL proposes two groups of signatories?
A. That’s so.
Q. The first group, Group A mentions two individuals called Vanessa Akofa Atsu and Ms Yvonne Philips?
A. That’s so.
Q. From your Exhibit F, F1 and F2, these are officials from the Beige Bank?
A. That’s not correct. They are officials of the Beige Group, and Yvonne Philip is Executive Support Head of the Beige Group.
Q. I’m putting it to you that the reason why the MD of FASL signed the letter to Beige Bank, confirming the change of signatories to include Beige Group, is because the Beige Group has now invested in FASL?
A. That’s a plausible assumption to make. I cannot confirm it for a fact; whether the Beige Group Limited, indeed, invested in the equity shares of FASL.
Q. Now, did you ever find out a Board resolution to confirm a change in the signatories of FASL to include officials of the Beige Group?
A. No my lady. The only extract of the minute of the Board of Directors, which we came across, related to the opening of the account, and not the change in the original signatories to the account.
Q. Since you did not know that the Beige Group has successfully invested in FASL or not, did you cross-check why they will change their signatories to include officials of Beige Group, even without a resolution?
A. There were discussions between the accused person and official of FASL in connection with the Beige Group investing in equity shares of FASL. I’m assuming that as part of the preparatory procedures to consummate that transaction, officials of FASL thought it necessary to request a change in signatory to their legitimate account held with Beige Bank – the account ending with ….121
Q. Look at Exhibit G, which is the excerpt of the Board minutes you tendered to prove the opening of what you called the legitimate account of FASL. It does not have a name attached to it for its Chairman or Secretary?
A. There is no name under the Chairman who signed the excerpts of the minutes, but I can see it is the stamp of the company’s Secretary, which is Lennap Company.
Q. There is no evidence before this count to show what you called legitimate account of FASL was open in pursuant to the resolution signed by an unnamed Chairman (Exhibit G)?
A. There is a lot of evidence to prove that fact. Attached to Exhibit E is the signature card of account No.0381520414121, which was signed by Kwesi Tetteh Dadzie and Gifty Afenyi-Dadzie. The same names indicated in Paragraph E of Exhibit G to be the signatories to that account.
My lady, the date of those signatures was November 11, 2017, and an extract from the bank’s system, November 2, 2017. Attached to the same Exhibit G is a direct extract from the Beige Bank’s system of the original signatories to that same account. And there are Kwesi Tetteh Dadzie and Gifty Afenyi-Dadzie as Group A signatories, and Yvonne Philips and Vanessa Atsu as Group B signatories.
You can also confirm on the signature card, I earlier stated that Yvonne and Vanessa also had their signatures on the card. My lady, strangely in contravention of the extract of the minutes of the Board of Directors, dated October 26, 2017.
Q: So if what you are saying is correct, it means right from the first day of the first account, you will see from the examples that the signature card was signed by Kwesi Tetteh Dadzie and Gifty Afenyi-Dadzie, Yvonne Phillips and Vanessa Atsu on the same day on November 22, 2017?
A. That’s so, and it is very strange how a customer of the bank represented by its Board of Directors would by a Board resolution instruct the bank to maintain two clearly indicated individuals as signatories to their account – being Kwesi Tetteh Dadzie and Gifty Afenyi-Dadzie – only for the signature card of the record of the bank to have a name and signatures of two additional individuals who, by virtue of their position they held at Beige Group, exerted some kind of authority over officials of the Beige Bank.
My lady, the expectation would have been that pursuant to the minutes of the Board of Directors, only signatories of Kwesi Tetteh Dadzie and Gifty Afenyi-Dadzie should have been attached to that legitimate account.
(Exhibit E is a signature card and Exhibit G is an excerpt of the minutes of the Board of Directors produces this to the court)
Q: Now, Exhibit G is not a Board resolution?
A: It is a Board resolution, because it states that “it was resolved that…”
Q. Before the statement was resolved – that there was an indication of what the records states – which clearly states that it was an excerpt of minutes of the Board of Directors [meeting]?
A. That’s so, and it is very normal for Board of Directors to pass resolutions in their meetings. So this resolution was passed in the meeting of the Board of Director held on October 26, 2017.
Q I’m putting it to you that Exhibit G only provides information as to what was resolved, and it is not the resolution by itself?
A. It is the resolution of the Board of Directors in connection with the opening of FASL’s legitimate account, ending with 121.
Q. I’m further putting it to you that the account number ending 121 was never opened with any Board resolution passed by FASL?
A. The account number was opened in accordance with Exhibit G. The only difference is that Yvonne Phillips and Vanessa Atsu found their way on to the signature card in contravention of the clear resolution contained on Exhibit G.
Q. And I’m finally putting it to you that no board of Directors resolutions was required to open FASL’s account?
A. A Board resolution is the requirement for the opening of a corporate account in any bank, without which an account cannot be opened in a name of a company. So for the fictitious account ending with 122 opened in the name of FASL, if it was, indeed, a regular account, there should have been a resolution of the Board of Directors of FASL instructing that account to be opened in their name, without which that account can only be described as illegitimate and fictitious.
And my lady, you can confirm that proceeds of… GH¢320 million were transferred from their accounts to that fictitious account. Out of it, the accused instructed various payments, totally about GH¢21 million, to be paid out to companies owned and controlled by him to the detriment of the affected customer. And it is contained in Paragraph 22 of my witness statement.
Q. Take a look at your Exhibit G again, or you look at the Paragraph C, it authorised the Chief Finance Officer of FASL to meet the Beige Bank to open the account?
A: That’s so.
Q: Do you know who this Chief Finance Officer is?
A: I didn’t know him. I don’t know the Chief Finance Officer at the time of passing the resolution.
Q. I’m putting it to you that you are not in a position to tell if any account was opened pursuant to Exhibit G?
A: I din’t have to know the Chief Finance Officer of FASL at the time of the passing of the resolution to tell whether the account was, indeed, opened. It is a fact that the FASL legitimate account ending with 121 was opened at Beige Bank. In fact, at the time when Beige Bank’s license was revoked on August 1, the balance was in the region of GH¢12 million.
That information is available, and if counsel wants us to provide him with the statement of account of FASL’s legitimate account ending with 121, it would be a pleasure.
Q. If, as you suggest, Vanessa found her name in the signature card of the legitimate FASL account, contrary to Exhibit G, can you explain to the court how come the same Vanessa Akofa, contrary to Exhibit G, has her name, together with Hon Gifty Afenyi-Dadzie, signing a letter to the bank requesting a change of signatories?
A. My lady, I’m unable to confirm for a fact why the two individuals, or names and signatures of the two individuals, Gifty and Vanessa Atsu, are on Exhibit E. What I know is that from discussions with officials of FASL, the Beige Group had expressed to invest in the equity shares of FASL.
Q. Did you ask Afenyi-Dadzie about how come Vanessa Akofa is on the same documents with her?
A: Personally no, but I’m aware a special investigation team (SIT) that was established to investigate matters relating to the collapse of Beige Bank had various discussions with persons associated with the matter under discussion, including Gifty Afenyi-Dadzie.
I may not be in the position to answer questions on their interrogation on this subject.
Case adjourned to Monday March 27, 2023.
Ghanaian Actor, Adjetey Anang, has revealed that his wife whom he has spent close to 16 years with sees him as a sex god.
According to him, his sexual life with his wife has never become boring as his wife constantly commends him for getting much better in bed as their years of marriage keep increasing.
Speaking in an interview With Sika Osei on the ‘Stripped by Sika Osei’ show on Lynx TV, Mr. Anang said that sex should not only start when couples get to the bedroom but should be a gradual process which could even begin with a conversation.
According to him, he had no idea about this when he first got married to his wife Elorm, as he thought sex was just a duty he needed to perform, as well as just having babies.
He also emphasised that his wife keeps surprising him with occasional hugs and sweet words to show her appreciation for the good work he does in bed.
The ‘Things We Do For Love’ star further advised couples who have been married for long to be patient and more relaxed when it comes to their sexual relationship.
Revered actor Adjetey Anang and his wife, Elom, have been married for 16 years. Adjetey and Elom got married on March 10, 2007.
In videos making rounds on social media, American Rapper Ludacris was seen in an apartment with Sarkodie in an apartment in Accra.
The ‘Oh’ rapper is in Ghana to collaborate with African Artistes for an Afrobeat Album, deepthroat reveal.
Fans of rapper, Sarkodie have showered him with praises for his unreleased project with American rapper, Ludacris which they say will make waves in Ghana and top international music charts.
“Guess who linked up after 11 years @ludacris,” Sarkodie captioned the video shared on his Instagram stories on March 20.
The two were later seen recording their verses of what is expected to be a masterpiece from the two rappers.
Fans of the Ghanaian rapper, have already sent congratulatory messages to him amidst his nomination as ‘Artiste of the Year’ for this year’s Ghana Music Awards.
Ludacris was served special Ghanaian jollof which he enjoyed while nodding his head.
Residents of Twin Cities Sekondi-Takoradi have thrown their support behind sons of the soil; Kofi Kinaata, Aya RamzyB and Lasmid who have earned nominations in this year’s Vodafone Ghana Music Awards (VGMA).
Charterhouse, event organizers of the awards on Saturday, March 18 released the full list of nominees for the 24th edition of the annual event and amongst the nomination were the three, who started their music career in Takoradi.
On social media and other entertainment shows on radio in Takoradi such as OC Showbiz Review on Skyy Power FM, Empire Entertainment Review on Empire FM, Y Podium on YFM, Connect Entertainment Review on Connect FM, Penpenaa on Spice FM, Compound House on Beach FM, Promo Time on Radio Shama amongst others, listeners called and texted to express their utmost support for the Artistes who have flown high the flag of the region.
In the nominations, Kofi Kinaata who holds an enviable record as the only Ghanaian Artiste to win the ‘Songwriter of the year’ four times was nominated in the Highlife Song of the year with the single, ‘Have Mercy.’ The ‘Things fall part’ crooner also earned nomination in the Highlife Artiste of the year category.
Lasmid, the ‘Friday Night’ hitmaker did magic with the single as he was nominated in the ‘New Artiste of the year,’ ‘Best Hiplife Song of the year’ and ‘Vodafone Most Popular Song’ with the monster hit song.
Aya Ramzy B, the reigning Artiste of the year at the Western Music Awards was nominated in the Unsung category as he battles five others to earn the category that introduces a budding Artiste to the Ghanaian music market.
A leading Public Policy think tank and Consumer Protection Organisation, CUTS International, Accra, is rallying Ghanaian consumers to join in the advocacy to get government through the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MOTI) to prioritise the passage of the Consumer protection law.
The law, when passed will empower, protect and enhance the welfare and interest of the consumer, promote a fair, transparent and efficient marketplace and also improve consumer awareness, education and information.
Speaking at a meeting organised by CUTS with partnership from the Law Faculty of the University of Professional Studies (UPSA), in Accra, to mark World Consumer Rights Day, the West African Regional Director for CUTS, Mr. Appiah Kusi Adomako, emphasised that it is evidently clear that the absence of Consumer Protection Law in the country has contributed to the widespread and deliberate abuse of consumer rights.
Mr. Adomako explained that consumer rights are like fundamental human rights which the state has to promote, protect and safeguard through the enactment of laws and its enforcement.
“With the passage of Companies Act, 2019, (Act 992) and Corporate Restructuring and Insolvency Act, 2020, (Act 1015), the next bill for consideration should be the Consumer Protection Bill as the two deal with the protection of supply and demand sides of the market participants. Experience tells us that in Ghana to get a bill passed, there must be a strong movement behind.” Mr. Adomako said.
“Imagine, a consumer walks into a shop to buy an item and takes it home and changes his or her mind. In about 99% of scenarios in the country, the consumer will not be able to return it because the shop has clearly written: goods sold are not returnable although this is against the existing laws” he added.
Dr. Franscica Kusi Appiah, a law lecturer at the University of Professional Studies (UPSA) underscored the importance of such meetings. She said consumer ought to be empowered to know their rights in various provisions.
The Communication and Programmes Lead for CUTS, Mr. Shadrack Nii Yarboi Yartey, revealed CUTS and Consumer Protection Agency (CPA) have mobilised over 20,000 signatures urging the Executive to tidy up every work that needs to be done on the draft bill and have it forwarded to Parliament.
“Unfortunately, the marching feat of over 20,000 Ghanaians who is calling for government to prioritize the bill was not enough to be convince the government to do the needful,” Mr. Yartey added.
Head of Research for CUTS, Mr Isaac Yaw Obeng also mentioned that “With the Africa Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA) operationalised and trading started, there is the need to have enhanced standards to protect Ghanaian consumers from substandard goods. The only way that the Ghanaian consumers can be empowered is through the passage and implementation of National Consumer Protection Law.”
Various regulators including the National Communication Authority (NCA), Food and Drugs Authority (FDA), National Petroleum Authority (NPA), Ghana Standard Authority (GSA), Public Utilities and Regulatory Commission (PURC) highlighted what their respective organizations are doing to protect the welfare and right of consumers in the absence of the Consumer Protection law.
The Deputy Director, Consumer and Corporate Affairs at the National Communication Authority (NCA), Mr Kwame Gyan, underscored the measures the NCA has put in place to address consumer concerns in the telecommunication sector. He indicated that a special desk has been established to listen to consumer concerns and address them.
A manager with the Consumer Unit at the National Petroleum Authority (NPA), Natasha Boakye, also said that the Authority recently embarked on a nationwide campaign to sensitise consumers on the use of fire extinguishers and the various redress mechanics available to them. She also explained that the Authority often conducts random checks at filing stations across to the country to ascertain the quality of fuel sold to consumers.
“These exercises are conducted to ensure that Oil Marketing Companies (OMCs) do not compromise on the quality and quantity of their petroleum products they sell to consumers and prosecute those that sell sub-standard fuel,” she added.
The Director of Legal at the Public Utilities Regulatory Commission, Mrs Nancy Atiamo, also indicated that consumer rights and welfare is at the heart of what they do as a commission. They organize public education campaigns to enlighten consumers.
On her path, a Marketing Officer and in-house graphic designer at the Ghana Standard Authority is committed to protecting the rights of consumers. Ensuring that products sold on the market meets Ghanaian and international standard which is safe for all.
Today marks exactly 57 years, exactly on February 24 1966, when Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, the first president and leader of this country, and his Convention People’s Party (CPP), was overthrown from office in a coup-d’état.
A section of the military, led by Colonel Emmanuel K. Kotoka, Major Akwasi Amankwa Afrifa, and the police, led by the then Inspector General of Police, J.W. K. Harley, took over the administration of this country while Nkrumah was outside this country.
The reasons for the coup, according to the leaders, was to liberate Ghana from Nkrumah’s dictatorship. They said the CPP administration was abusive and corrupt. Above all, they pointed to the dire economic situation and absence of democratic practices in the nation—a situation they claimed had affected the morale of citizens, and especially of the armed forces. The majority of Ghanaians, including some prominent members of the CPP, supported this declaration.
Ironically, Nkrumah who had supported a military coup in Nigeria, and offered his support to the military in that country, condemned his own ouster in outrageous terms.
The fact we are still debating Nkrumah after the collapse of Nkrumahism is evidence of the allure of the pernicious ideology of socialism, (central planning), which continues to seduce people by promising to re-distribute of wealth.
Indeed, 24th February 1966 evokes mixed feelings among Ghanaians. Was Nkrumah a victim of the Cold War? Was 24 February a day of shame? Or the day freedom and liberty won against tyranny and dictatorship?
While the debate continues, supporters of Nkrumah and so-called big government fanatics in Ghana, continue to stifle the expression of any views that cut against their opinions. It is necessary to use this anniversary to push back against pseudo-censorship, and to once again, look at his ideas, and the consequences of his policies on the economy of this country with open and clear eyes. History is the impartial judge of all human actions.
Nkrumah’s scientific socialism, sought to place every Ghanaian in a one-party “workers’ paradise” under absolute dependency on the State: for an education, a job, and a place to live. Opportunities for economic and social advancement, and selected benefits and privileges was bestowed on only those loyal and obedient to the CPP.
The “classless society,” which he tried to impose on the people of this country was in reality, an intricate hierarchical labyrinth of status, position, and degrees of power depending upon the individual’s place within the vast bureaucratic network of central government planning.
Nkrumah’s scientific socialism, sought to place every Ghanaian in a one-party “workers’ paradise” under absolute dependency on the State: for an education, a job, and a place to live. Opportunities for economic and social advancement, and selected benefits and privileges was bestowed on only those loyal and obedient to the CPP.
The “classless society,” which he tried to impose on the people of this country was in reality, an intricate hierarchical labyrinth of status, position, and degrees of power depending upon the individual’s place within the vast bureaucratic network of central government planning.
The human mind deceives, lies, hides, lulls, beguiles, dull memories, and time kills pains in the long term. That is why fifty-seven years after the overthrow of Nkrumah, his weaknesses and jubilation at the news of the coup is forgotten. Now, the man is assessed with honour and his shortcomings are overlooked. Was he a good man? A great man? And is greatness beyond good and evil?
We need our heroes. Nkrumah to some extent is a hero. We recognise his role and his vision for this country and for the excitement he created for the liberation of Africa, and for the people of African descent, all over the world. Indeed, he remains as the foremost Ghanaian leader who has a vision, no matter how flawed. He was unrelenting in his fight against imperialism and neo-colonialism.
Nkrumah achieved some measure of support for Ghana from both the East and West during his time, but he failed to build a sound and prosperous economy for this country. He diverted his attention from the development of a strong local economy to play in the political stage of the world.
In his haste to create socialism, he forgot that without entrepreneurial activity, capital is just a heap of capital goods. Without the entrepreneur, capital is dead. It takes entrepreneurial activity to bring capital to life and to keep capital alive.
At a time when we honour our past, our focus should firmly be on the future. Turning this country into a one-party dictatorship was not necessary at the time. His paranoia against all criticisms and desire to stifle all opposition to his regime was the mark of a dictator. Whatever economic growth of the Nkrumah years also occurred, against a backdrop of political repression.
Mind control through propaganda, censorship, and indoctrination were rigorously put into effect to inculcate “socialist values” especially among schoolchildren in order to eradicate bourgeois, capitalist thinking.
Ironically, on 6th March 1957, his independence proclamation freed a nation from colonialism, but he depended on imperialists to fund his economic policies. He declared a peoples’ republic, but he was intolerant of the peoples’ views. He insisted on equality, but he practiced cronyism. He said he was fighting for liberty, but approved the arrest of opponents and the suspension of habeas corpus.
While he was busy propounding his vision of the unity of Africa and the non-aligned movement, he neglected the Ghanaian economy. His idea of the need to use government to control the commanding heights of the economy with western capital and eastern socialism modelled on an African variation was simply not very deep or thorough.
The apologists still taking Nkrumah and his industrialisation policies seriously choose to ignore or downplay the mess that his scientific socialism created in both Ghanaian commerce and agriculture.
At independence, Ghana possessed a prosperous peasant farming class, which had established itself and was producing two-thirds of the world’s cocoa supply. Nkrumah deliberately undermined them. He used the Cocoa Marketing Board to appropriate the farmer’s money to finance his development programmes. Unfortunately, that appropriation continues today. Nkrumah’s agricultural policy rejected the peasant farmers with the introduction of the Workers Brigade.
Nkrumah showed he was indifferent to corruption, financial responsibility and accepted no financial restraint and discipline. This started a spiral of corruption in the public sector …. it continues today. Contrary to public opinion, he failed also to fight the evils of tribalism with its ritualistic code of fear and authority that robs individuals of their individuality and humanity.
Nkrumah trampled on our freedoms, led us down a path to a dystopian future where we were supposed to own nothing. His educational system was supposed to empower people. That is the aim of free education. It is believed that access to a free, basic education would take many Ghanaians out of poverty.
However, the opposite is the truth. Our public and private schools, remain nurturers of entitlement and dependent children. Why? Because it fits into the agenda of the political networks that make the welfare system relevant.
We are a nation infected with an entitlement and ‘social justice’ mentality from which we now find difficult to cure. Destroying entrepreneurial capitalism in favour of state capitalism and socialism led to economic decline.
Nkrumah promised a higher living standard for the poor, but deceived himself into believing that more government interventionism and more control of business could reach those aims. The opposite was the case. The dismal zombie parade of bad policies, from both leading parties in Ghana, aided by neo-colonialists, is crushing people’s potential to prosper.
What matters most right now is this country should wean itself from the vampire statist ideology. Socialist central planning and re-distribution policies will not deliver prosperity because it failed to address the fundamental weaknesses of the Ghanaian economy, its lack of productiveness and its failure to build strong local entrepreneurs and institutions.
That is, if we are willing to go forward as a country.
And if we do want to go forward, patriots should not be afraid to take a meat cleaver to economic vampire sectors like, education, and healthcare, which have been the main focus of redistribution of wealth since independence and a major contributor to our economic stagnation.
Ghana can be a prosperous country. However, it takes principles and a commitment to equity to either make a country prosperous or destroy it. The prosperity we are talking about could only happen when leaders understand wealth creation and are humble to include citizens from decisive participation in government. Sadly, our leaders are still not committed to the rule of law, property rights and while still preaching fair play and democratic tolerance, trample on the rights of individuals with impunity.
The bid to secure a place in Africa’s biggest football spectacle, the TotalEnergies Africa Cup of Nations continues this week with some eye-catching encounters as African nations prepare to put their best foot forward to seal a place in the continental showpiece set for Cote D’Ivoire next year.
A total of 44 nations will be in action over the week of 22 – 24 March, with some nations looking at extending their leads, while others look to regain ground in the race to qualification.
Three-time African champions, Nigeria welcome Guinea Bissau to the Abiola Stadium in Abuja where they will be aiming at stretching their lead at the top of Group A, following their victories over Sao Tome E Principe and Sierra Leone.
The Stallions of Burkina Faso, who currently occupy top spot in Group B, play host to a bruised Togo side, who are looking for their first victory of the qualifiers following their loss to Cape Verde that was followed by a share of the spoils with Eswatini.
Concluding the group B action will be Cape Verde, who continue to be on a steady rise in African football. They welcome a resilient Eswatini side who are equally and gradually outgrowing being pushovers on the continent.
Five-time African champions, Cameroon face Burundi in their first Group C assignment, following their walkover result over Kenya as they sit top of the group. The East Africans on the other hand secured a valuable away point to Namibia and will be looking at building from that result and unseating the Indomitable Lions from the summit of the group.
Egypt, who find themselves in a precarious position at the bottom of Group D as a result of goal-difference, welcome Malawi to the Cairo International Stadium, while Guinea play host to a high in confidence Ethiopia in a match set to be played at the Mohammed V Complex Stadium in Casablanca, Morocco.
HIGH STAKES
A top of the table clash awaits Group E as Ghana welcome Angola who are equal on points with the Black Stars and will be looking at causing an upset in Kumasi’s Baba Yara Sports Stadium.
The newly built, Nelson Mandela Stadium in Algeria’s capital of Algiers sees Group F table toppers, Algeria welcoming second placed, Niger in what promises to be an action-packed encounter, while the Ugandan Cranes are looking at climbing out of the danger zone as they play host to Tanzania in a match set to be played at Egypt’s Suez Canal Stadium in Ismailia.
In Group J, a north African battle looms as group leaders, Tunisia travel to Libya for what promises to be a tough encounter between the two sides at the Martyrs of Benina Stadium.
MUST-WIN FOR BAFANA
An interesting battle in Group K sees Liberia taking on South Africa in a must-win match for both sides who lost against table toppers, Morocco. Both sides understand that a victory sets them up for a strong chance of a second-placed finish of the group, which subsequently secures them a ticket to Cote D’ Ivoire.
To conclude the round of qualifiers, reigning African champions, Senegal is looking at maintaining their 100%-win record in Group L when they take on Mozambique at the Me Abdoulaye Wade de Diamniadio Stadium in Dakar.
Benin, Rwanda kick-start Afcon qualifiers
An important three points will be up for grabs when Benin host Rwanda in a 2023 Africa Cup of Nations qualifier at the Friendship Stadium in Cotonou on Wednesday afternoon. Both teams are winless after the opening two rounds in Group L and they are in desperate need of a result to keep their respective hopes alive of qualifying for the showpiece in Ivory Coast next year.
The Benin Football Federation (FEBEFOOT) has subsequently turned to Gernot Rohr in an attempt to get the West African nation’s Afcon qualifying campaign back on track.
Former Nigeria manager Rohr has signed a three-year contract with FEBEFOOT and revealed that money was not the motivating factor in his decision to take on this new challenge.
Rwanda warmed up for the clash with a 1-0 loss to Ethiopia and will need to address the lack of concentration among players ahead of the trip to West Africa.
The two teams last met in a 2014 World Cup qualifier on 8 September 2013 when Benin emerged 2-0 victors – their second triumph in four encounters, with Rwanda claiming their solitary win in a 2012 Afcon qualifier on 9 October 2011.
Angola forced to make changes against Ghana
Angola have been forced into two changes to their squad for their two Africa Cup of Nations qualifiers against Ghana over the next week.
Angola take Ghana in Kumasi on Thursday before hosting them in Luanda four days later.
Injury to Italian-based winger Zito Luvumbo has seen a call-up for Loide, who plays for Mafra in the Portuguese second division, while Tó Carneiro comes in for the Belgian-based Núrio Fortuna among the defenders.
Coach Paulo Goncalves also said Vitoria Guimaraes’ midfielder Nelson Luz would not be joining up with the squad despite a call-up.
There are first call ups for Portuguese-born midfielder Bruno Paz, a former academy player at Sporting Lisbon who is now at Konyaspor in Turkey, and Sagrada Esperança defender Lulas.
Angola have been preparing for Thursday’s match in Algeria, where Petro Atletico played at the weekend in the African Champions Laue. There are six players from the GiraBola champions in the Angola squad, including former Cape Town City goalkeeper Hugo Marques.
‘Palancas Negras’ share top place in Group E with Ghana’s Black Stars after the opening two rounds of the qualifiers last June when they beat the Central African Republic at home in Luanda and drew away in Madagascar to make a strong start to their bid to qualify for the finals in the Ivory Coast in January.
Dr Cassiel Ato Forson - Former Deputy Minister for Finance
Dr Cassiel Ato Forson, former Deputy Minister for Finance and Minority Leader in Parliament, says the Attorney General (A-G) has not adduced enough evidence to pin him down on €2,370,000.00 ambulance related financial loss to the Republic.
According to him, evidence adduced by the prosecution is not enough to warrant him to open his defence.
In a 38 page of the written ‘submission of no case to answer’ filed by Dr Ato Forson’s legal team, led by Dr Abdul Baasit Aziz Bamba, on March 16, 2023 the Legislator contended that the A-G could not establish prima facie case to back the claim that he caused financial loss to the Republic of Ghana and intentionally misapplied public property.
According to the lead Counsel, the establishment of Letters of Credit (LCs) which has caused the instant trial were not authorised by the first accused (A1), Dr Forson.
He argued that A1 could not have caused financial loss to the Republic, particularly when LCs are not payment by themselves.
Dr Bamba argued extensively on written submission to the Financial and Economic Division of the Accra High Court that the A-G in an effort to pin down A1, attempted to ambush him with the claim that the ambulance contract didn’t receive parliamentary approval.
The Counsel described the A-G’s claim as lacking legal merit and ought to be disregarded by the court, presided over by Justice Afia Serwaa Asare-Botwe, a Court of Appeal justice with additional responsibility of the High Court.
He stated in paragraph 63 of his submission: “The prosecution has provided no cogent rebuttal evidence to refute the claim contained in the legal opinion of the Attorney General that all governmental approvals had been sought for the ambulance contract, which was valid and enforceable.
“If prosecution was desirous of proving the absence of parliamentary approval for the ambulance contract, they bore the burden of providing evidence from parliament to show there was no such approval, but failed.”
Essentially, he asserted that lack of parliamentary approval is not part of the prosecution’s case and, therefore, couldn’t adduce any evidence to that effect.
He further argued that since LCs do not constitute payments, payments under the LC were authorised by the Ministry of Health and not the first accused.
A1 Counsel explained that Ministry of Health (MoH) authorised payments under the LC, after having approved documents submitted to Big Sea, the supplier of the ambulances, by giving Ghana International Bank the green light to pay the supplier.
Dr Bamba further argued that A1 signed the LC in the capacity as a deputy minister, which is recognised by the 1992 Constitution in Article 79(1) which reads: “the president in consultation with a Minister of State and with prior approval of parliament appoint one or more deputy ministers to assist the minister in the performance of his functions.”
Accordingly, he said the then Finance Minister, Seth Terkper, had given a statement to the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), which acknowledges the Ministry request for the establishment of the LCs for the purchase of the ambulances.
He said Mr Terkper’s statement had been tendered in evidence without the prosecution raising any objection, yet “the prosecution made no attempt to call Seth Terkper as a witness in order to deny the fact that he or the Ministry of Finance authorised 1st accused person to author Exhibit A and B1.”
In furtherance to this, Dr. Bamba told the court: “We submit that, contrary to the assertions in the particulars of offence of Counts 1 and 5 that AI ‘authorised’ or ‘caused’ irrevocable letters of credit to be established, it is clear from the evidence on record that Al never ‘authorised’ or ‘caused irrevocable’ letters of credit to be established nor did AI act in any manner without due cause and authorisation. Exhibits A and B1, which bear the signature of AI were transmitted to Bank of Ghana under the authority of and on behalf of the Minister of Finance, as confirmed by Exhibit 5 for Al.”
Dr Ato Forson is standing trial with two others – MoH former Chief Director, Sylvester Anemana (A2) and businessman and local representative of Big Sea Trading Limited, Richard Japka (A3).
The Lawmaker has been charged in count one, wilfully causing financial loss to the Republic contrary to section 179A(3)(a) of Criminal Offences Act, 1960(Act 29) and counts five, intentionally misapplying public property contrary to section 1(2) of the Public Protection Act, 1977 (SMCD 140).
Particulars of Offence under count ‘1’ were that Cassiel Ato Forson between August 2014 and April 2016 in Accra in the Greater Accra Region of the Republic of Ghana wilfully caused financial loss of €2,370,000.00 to the Republic by authorising irrevocable letters of credit valued at €3,950,000.00 to be established, out of which payments amounting to €2,370,000.00 were made to Big Sea General Trading Ltd (sic) for the supply of vehicles purporting to be ambulances without due cause and authorisation.
On count ‘5’, A1 between August 2014 and April 2016 in Accra in the Greater Accra Region of the Republic of Ghana intentionally misapplied the sum of € 2,370,000.00 being public property by causing irrevocable letters of credit to be established against the budget of the Ministry of Health in favour of Big Sea General Trading Ltd (sic) for the supply of vehicles purporting to be ambulances without due cause and authorisation.
In the light of this, his counsel urged the court that Section 173 of Act casts a mandatory duty on the court to evaluate the evidence and determine whether a case has been sufficiently made against A1 to require him to open his defence.
He prayed to the court to discharge A1 because the prosecution has provided pieces of evidence that are not concrete enough to hold water.
A-G’s response
On the part of the Attorney General, Godfred Yeboah Dame, he told the court that the prosecution had laid sufficient evidence incriminating A1 and the other accused persons for them to be compelled to open their defence.
He argued that the prosecution has established a prima facie case through tendering documents and testimonies by witnesses.
According to him, the purchase of 200 ambulances through the MoH for the National Ambulance Service (NAS) received Cabinet blessing on December 22, 2011 through a €15,800,000.00 loan facility from the Stannic Bank.
However, it is contained in the A-G’s written submission that there was no mention of Big Sea General Trading Limited in the United Arab Emirates (UEA) in the memorandum submitted to parliament or its approval for financing agreement between the Government of Ghana and Stannic Bank, for the procurement of the 200 ambulances on November 1, 2012.
He contended that the Public Prosecution Authority (PPA) approved single-sourced engagement of Big Sea to supply the 200 ambulance through Sylvester Anemana’s false representation.
As a result, the Government of Ghana through the Ministry of Health entered into a formal agreement with Big Sea to supply the 200 ambulance at estimated cost €15, 800,000.00.
Establishing the criminal involvement of Dr Forson, he said on August 7, 2014 he wrote a letter to the Bank of Ghana, urgently requesting the establishment of Letters of Credit for the supply of 50 ambulances at the cost of €3,950,000.00, representing 25 percent of the total cost, in favour of Big Sea.
Similarly, A1 was said to have written to the Controller and Accountant General (CAG), authorising it to release GH¢806,688.75 to MoH to enable it to pay bank charges covering the establishment of the LC on August 12 of the same year.
He added that, based on these letters, MoH also wrote to the Bank of Ghana on August 14, authorising it to establish irrevocable transfer of the LC in the sum of €3,950,000.00 in favour of Big Sea.
Contrary to the supply of 50 ambulances agreed between Big Sea and MoH, only 20 were ready for shipment and to make things worse, they were full of defects on arrival in two batches.
Mr Dame indicated that the third batch of consignment was not different from the other two batches, to which then MoH Minister said the vehicles do meet specifications.
On these scores, the A-G urged the court that A1 has a question to answer for authorising irrevocable LC value at €3,950,000.00 and out of it, €2,370,000 was paid to Big Sea, to result in a financial loss to the Republic.
He also stated that A1 caused the establishment of the LCs without any authorisation, saying “We have established clearly, under submissions on count one that Al’s authorisation for LCs to be issued as payment for the vehicles purporting to be ambulances was highly unwarranted and, indeed, reckless, having regard to the circumstances under which the authorisation for payment was made.”
The A-G strongly hold the view that a prima facie case has been established against all the accused persons to be ordered by the court open their defence.
