ghananlpcommunity/ghana-gov-speeches-sentences huggingface dataset:
In November 2017, a request was made to the then Speaker of Parliament, the Rt.
Aaron Mike Ocquaye, for me to assist the Economic and Organized Crimes Office (EOCO) with their investigation into this matter.
I provided a statement to the EOCO detailing my honest recollection of the transaction.
Interestingly, nothing was heard of the investigation until November 2021, a period of four years, when I started raising concerns about the 2022 Budget and Economic Policy of the Government.
During this period, the Secretariat of the Rt.
Honourable Speaker informed me that the EOCO had requested that I be released to assist with further investigation into the purchase of the ambulances.
I was further informed that the Office of the Attorney General had requested that a charge statement be taken from me in preparation for formal charges to be filed against me.
The coincidence speaks volumes about the motivation for these frivolous and baseless charges.
A cursory reading of the frivolous and politically motivated charges shows that my only role in the entire transaction was to have signed a letter on behalf of the Minister of Finance, in my capacity as Deputy Finance Minister, for the establishment of letters of credit by the Bank of Ghana and for payment by the Controller Accountant General of the charges for the letters of credit.
If I may ask, ladies and gentlemen of the press, since when did ministerial instruction for the establishment of letters of credit become a crime in this dear country of ours?
It is important to note that, whilst I am being prosecuted for my role in instructing that letters of credit be established for the purchase of ambulances for use in our health delivery system, the Attorney General does not see it fit to prosecute those who left the ambulances purchased with taxpayer money to rot while pregnant women are being carried on bicycles, aboboyaa, push trucks and okada bikes to hospitals all over the country to deliver the next generation of Ghanaians.
Between the person who requested that letters of credit be established for the purchase of ambulances and the person who took the decision to leave the purchased ambulances to deteriorate, who has caused financial loss to the state?
Which of these two has misapplied state property?
Ladies and Gentlemen: I must point out that the instructions of the Ministry of Finance for the establishment of letters of credit was preceded by a well-written opinion of the Attorney General in an opinion letter dated May 9, 2014, advising the Ministry of Health on this transaction.
It was based upon the advice of the Attorney General that the Legal Division of the Ministry of Finance advised the Minister of Finance, not the Deputy Minister, to take steps to establish the letters of credit.
At the appropriate time, and in the course of the trial, we will make available the full complement of documentation through the process of discovery.
In the meantime, the question you should be asking the Attorney General and his Director of Public Prosecutions is why they are running away from their own legal opinion?
Don’t they know that it is highly unethical and unprofessional for a lawyer to issue an opinion on the position of the law on a matter and then turn around to act against her own advice?
I dare say that that is professional misconduct.
It should be noted that I did not authorise payment for the said 2,370,000 Euros, My only job in the entire transaction was to request the issuance of LC (Letter of Credit) on the authority of the Minister of Finance, A letter of credit is letter from a bank guaranteeing that a buyer's payment to a seller will be received on time and for the correct amount.
In the event that the buyer is unable to make a payment on the purchase, the bank will be required to cover the full or remaining amount of the purchase.
Ladies and Gentlemen: May I take this opportunity to thank you for coming to this press conference and to once again assure the good people of this country that neither myself as the Ranking Member on Finance nor the NDC Minority Group will relent on our fight to ensure that the feet of this profligate Government is held to the fire.
We will stand firm and protect the people of Ghana from misrule and poor economic policy choices.
Not even a million prosecutions will stop us in our quest to ensure accountability and transparency in the management of our public finances.
Thank you and God bless our homeland Ghana.
It is with great pleasure that I join you today for the inauguration of the FLS Service Centre, an investment that underscores the evolving landscape of Ghana’s mining industry and its commitment to efficiency, sustainability, and value addition.
I extend my heartfelt congratulations to the leadership of FLSmidth for this significant milestone.
The establishment of this service centre is not only a commendable investment but a strategic move that will enhance the operational effectiveness of the mining sector in Ghana and beyond.
It reflects the increasing importance of technology-driven solutions in improving efficiency, reducing costs, and strengthening the overall competitiveness of the industry.
The mining and quarrying industry in Ghana remains a cornerstone of our national economy contributing about 10% to Ghana’s GPD in 2024.
Beyond its contribution to GDP, the mining sector remains the largest source of export revenue, providing crucial foreign exchange earnings that sustain our economy.
Gold alone accounted for over 50% of total export revenue, reinforcing Ghana’s status as Africa’s leading gold producer in 2024.
On the whole, the minerals sector contributed over 60% of total export revenue, far in excess of the discrete receipts from crude oil, cocoa and inward remittance.
To ensure that the sector’s dominance in merchandise exports translates into increased availability of forex for financial intermediation and its pass through effect on exchange rate stability, the Chamber’s members returned an average of 74% of their export earnings to the country through the central and commercial banks in the last five years.
Recent fiscal data highlights the preeminent role of the mining sector in funding the country’s development priorities.
In 2023, the mining industry contributed GH₵11.5 billion in taxes, representing approximately 23% of direct domestic revenue mobilized by the Ghana Revenue Authority and 9% of government revenue.
These statistics are remarkable when considered within the context that it largely excludes the small-scale gold sector which accounts for nearly 30% of national gold production.
Further, the greatest impact of the mining sector on job creation is through its relationship with mining support service providers, such as FLSmidth.
To optimize this potential, the Chamber and its member companies prioritize purchases of goods and services from resident companies.
As the ecosystem of local mining support service providers expands, it not only generates more employment opportunities but also enhances value retention within the country, fostering broader economic development.
In 2023, the Chamber’s producing member companies procured goods and services worth $3.1 billion from local vendors.
This expenditure represents 53% of their total mineral revenue of $5.9 billion.
Similarly, the Minerals Commission data on local content, which tracked expenditure on 50 items as of 2023, shows that mining companies purchased inputs worth $2.4 billion from in-country vendors, that is, both manufacturers and retailers.
This translates into 41% of mineral revenue in 2023.
With a pipeline of new projects, Ghana’s mining sector is poised to deepen its developmental footprint on Ghana’s economy and become a major hub for mining support services.
Indeed, the true value of our industry extends beyond extraction; it lies in how we leverage technology, innovation, and local expertise to enhance productivity, sustainability, and socio-economic benefits.
This is where investments like the FLS Service Centre play a transformative role.
The establishment of this facility aligns with the Chamber’s drive for in-country value creation, local content development, and a robust mining support ecosystem.
By providing world-class equipment servicing, spare parts, and technical support, this centre will: Minimize operational downtime, allowing mining firms to operate more efficiently.
Enhance supply chain reliability, reducing the industry’s dependence on overseas servicing.
Strengthen local expertise, ensuring Ghanaian engineers and technicians have access to advanced training and cutting-edge industry knowledge Beyond its direct operational benefits, the FLS Service Centre will create jobs, employing a diverse workforce, from engineers and technicians to administrative professionals.
These are not just jobs—they are livelihoods that support families, empower communities, and drive national economic growth.
Moreover, this facility will contribute to national revenue generation through taxes and levies, reinforcing the government’s ability to fund critical development initiatives.
Recently, the Chamber engaged the African Center for Energy Policy to conduct a study on how to position Ghana as the hub for mining support service in West Africa.
The study revealed several opportunities within the mining supply chain, and these are opportunities we seek to encourage businesses in Ghana to take advantage of.
The success of Ghana’s mining industry hinges on collaborative partnerships between government, the private sector, and key stakeholders.
In that regard, I commend FLSmidth for its foresight in establishing this facility and for reaffirming its commitment to Ghana’s industrial and economic progress.
I also encourage other industry players to explore similar value-enhancing initiatives that promote efficiency, sustainability, and long-term sectoral growth.
Investments in local manufacturing, mining technology, and workforce development are crucial in securing Ghana’s position as a regional hub for mining excellence.
As we celebrate this milestone, we must also look to the future of Ghana’s mining industry.
Continued investment in innovation, sustainability, and responsible mining practices will be key to driving long-term economic transformation.
The Ghana Chamber of Mines remains committed to working alongside all stakeholders to build an industry that not only generates wealth but also delivers lasting benefits to the people of Ghana.
Once again, congratulations to FLSmidth on this remarkable achievement.
I have no doubt that the FLS Service Centre will be a game-changer, reinforcing Ghana’s leadership in mining excellence.
By Ghana Chamber of Mines CEO, Dr Sulemanu Koney
Chairperson of the Electoral Commission Charlotte Osei has provided a 27-point response to each of the allegations leveled by some concerned staff of the commission who want their boss removed.
The 15-page response is reproduced below: RE: PETITION AGAINST THE CHAIRPERSON OF ELECTORAL COMMISSION, MRS.
CHARLOTTE OSEI As a point of order with regard to the recent unfounded accusations leveled at Mrs.
Charlotte Osei in her capacity as Chairperson of the EC Ghana, Mr.
Maxwell Opoku-Agyemang is not a staff member of the Commission.
Whilst he claims to act on behalf of “Concerned Staff” of the Commission, he has not made clear who those “staff’ indeed are.
This is of particular importance as he has previously introduced himself at another forum as counsel for Ms.
Georgina Opoku-Amankwaa, the deputy Chairperson Corporate Services of the Commission.
In order for this to be considered as a legitimate submission on behalf of the staff, the names and signatures of these concerned staff must be provided in support of the so-called petition submitted.
With regard to the baseless allegations, below is a detailed response on all points raised with supporting documentation, which it is noted, Mr.
Maxwell Opoku-Agyemang and his fictitious petitioners have failed to provide.
Claim 1: “Madam Charlotte Osei, the Chairperson of the Electoral Commission on 30 th June, 2015 assumed office as Article 71 appointee whiles still holding office as a Board Member of Ghana Re Insurance, a public company contrary to Article 44(4) of the 1992 Constitution.
When the use was raised, the PRO of Ghana Re confirmed that she only resigned on December 5 th , 2015.
This means that whiles holding office as the Chairperson of the Commission, she was still a Board Member of Ghana Re Insurance.”
Response 1: Ghana Reinsurance is a limited liability company with shares held by the government of Ghana.
A non-executive director position is not a “public office” which my esteemed counsel should well know.
Claim 2: “ Mrs.
Charlotte Osei was appointed as Chairperson of Electoral Commission of Ghana while holding office as Chairperson of the National Commission of Civic Education contrary to the 1992 Constitution.
In fact, it was announced as her swearing-in ceremony by the former president that he received her resignation from the NCCE on 29 th June, 2017 before the swearing in. ”
Response 2: Appointment to the office of Chairperson of the Electoral Commission took effect on June 30, 2015.
Resignation as Chairperson of the NCCE pre-dated the swearing in on June 30, 2015.
The Chairperson therefore cannot be accusedof holding two public positions simultaneously.
She certainly did not receive two salaries for the month of June 2015.
Claim 3: “ Following her appointment as EC chair, Mrs.
Charlotte compromised the independence and neutrality of the Commission by arranging for 2015 V8 Landcruiser with registration WR 2291-15 from the Office of the President for use as official vehicle without going through the procurement process or recourse to the Commission.”
Response 3: Following her appointment as Chairperson, Mrs.
Osei was allocated a vehicle by the Office of the Chief of Staff.
This is certainly not a new practice.
Indeed, the office of the Chief of Staff provided and continues to provide vehicles for many government institutions and appointees.
The Chairperson could therefore not have compromised her independence or neutrality as she never requested nor lobbied for the said vehicle.
Indeed, this flawed argument would imply that the Commission receiving money from the Government of Ghana compromises the neutrality of the Commission.
Claim 4: “ The political posture of the Chairperson prior to the conduct of the 2016 General Election nearly pushed Ghana to the precipices.
But for the action of technical and competent staff of the Commission, she could have plunged this country into civil war.”
Response 4: The petitioners would have to define “political posture” which nearly pushed the country to civil war.
It is a witnessed fact that during the election, the Chairperson was in touch directly with the two main candidates in the presidential election in her capacity as Returning Officer .
The then candidates are in a position to confirm this.
The Chairperson remained in continuous contact with the hierarchy of the Ghana Police Service and the Military until the final declaration of results to ensure a peaceful conclusion to the election.
It is well documented by several observer bodies that this election was safe, free and fair and the Chairperson is directly acknowledged as having been instrumental in ensuring this.
Claim 5: “ Mrs.
Charlotte Osei, without recourse to the Commission engaged the Service of lawyers Sorry@law without going through the procurement process.
This service engagement goes contrary to the Public Procurement Act.
As at now, there is no formal contractual arrangement between the Commission and the Solicitors.
The basis of fees computation for services rendered by these lawyers still remains unknown.”
Response 5: Sory@ Law was retained on the basis of a decision of the Commission taken at a Commission meeting of September 2015.
It was made clear at the meeting that fees for litigation related work cannot be agreed ahead as it would depend on the complexity of each case and the court where a case was filed.
For instance, Supreme Court cases are usually billed higher than cases conducted at the High Court.
It was therefore the function of the Chairperson to refer all incoming law suits to Sory@Law on the basis of the Commission’s decision.
It was the function of the Deputy Chair F/A to negotiate the fees for each matter referred with Sory@Law.
Indeed, all bills submitted by Messrs.
Sory@Law for over ten cases referred in 2015/2016 remain unpaid.
If it is true that the Chairperson unilaterally retained Sory@Law, members of the Commission including the two Deputy Chairpersons would clearly have to explain the basis for meetings held between the entire Commission and Lawyer T. Sory, and other meetings between management and executive management staff, and staff of Sory@Law to discuss pending cases.
Claim 6: “The Commission signed a contract with Super Tech Limited(STL) on the premise that the Voters Registration Exercise was going to be electoral area based.
Upon assumption of office as the Chairperson of the Commission, Mrs.
Charlotte Osei unilaterally abrogated the said contract without recourse to the same Commission that approved the earlier version.
She single handedly renegotiated the contract with the vendor without involvement of the members of the Commission not even the deputies.
She then awarded the contract to the tune of $21,999, 592 without going through tender contrary to the Public Procurement Act.
The Chairperson reawarded these contracts without seeking approval from the Commission.
In the opinion of the Commission, these contracts could have been negotiated further down if members of the Commission had been involved.
This is because the change in the 2016 voters registration process required automatic reduction in these contracts.”
Response 6: The two Deputy Chairpersons signed 2 contracts with STL on 6 May 2015 for $22.3 (BVR) and $16.4m (BVD) respectively (copies attached and marked “CO6A).
Letters were written to PPA on 15 May 2015 (copies attached and marked CO6B) seeking permission for sole sourcing AFTER the contracts had been signed.
The contracts contained no price break down and were signed against the 2016 budget of the Commission which was unknown at the time and not even presented to Parliament for approval.
The procurement department of the Commission had no knowledge of the execution of the contracts (Please see CO6C attached).
The Chairperson informed the Deputy Chairpersons of the many breaches of law in connection with these contracts.
The Deputy Chair Ops confirmed the illegalities in an email and also confessed his lack of knowledge of procurement processes (please see CO6D attached).
The Chairperson abrogated the contracts in August 2015 and requested the Finance department to re-negotiate with STL and rectify the contract award process.
Upon receipt of the consent of the PPA to sole sourcing, she engaged consultants to advise the Commission on the real needs of the Commission regarding the BVR contract and review the proposals submitted by STL.
The Consultants confirmed that the Commission should spend a maximum of $7.2m (attached as CO6E).
The Chairperson signed a new contract with STL for the BVR services for the 2016 elections for $3.9m (attached as CO6F) Interestingly, STL has not complained about the abrogation of the contracts.
It is amazing that persons, who schemed to cause loss to the state, flout procurement laws with impunity, can then accuse another of acting illegally.
When the first contracts were signed, no one in the Commission was involved in the negotiations.
Quite surprisingly, it is now alleged that their involvement would have resulted in better pricing for the Commission.
Claim 7: “As part of compromising her independence and neutrality, Mrs.
Charlotte Osei claimed that the Electoral Commission has been allocated a new building for use as office complex without the approval of the Commission.
The 7 member Commission has not at any point in time formally requested for any office allocation since the Commission sees nothing wrong the current office.
With the Chairperson’s insatiable demand of affluence and flamboyance, she unilaterally awarded a contract to the tune of GHS3.9 Million for demarcation and partitioning of the said office complex without recourse to the Commission.
She claimed she sought approval from the Public Procurement Authority but strangely enough, the contract sum is higher than approved level.”
Response 7: The Chairperson informed the Commission in late 2015 that the Commission had requested new office premises from the Presidency to house the new secretariat of the Association of African Election Authorities (AAEA) after Ghana had been voted as a permanent secretariat of the AAEA in July 2015 with responsibility to provide office space for the AAEA.
In February 2016, at a Commission meeting (extract of minutes attached as CO7A), members were informed that Government had allocated a new office building to the Commission through the office of the Chief of Staff.
Members were further informed that the new office was a new build and would only require partitioning and all commissioners were encouraged to visit the new premises.
The Chairperson subsequently visited the new site with the two Deputy Chairpersons and a commission member, all of who were very excited by the new office.
The Chairperson has no control over the office of the Chief of Staff or the Presidency and clearly cannot obtain the permission of the Commission if a new office is allocated to the Commission.
The current offices have major structural defects, parts of the roof are collapsing, significant leakages in most offices, damp and mouldy walls, electrical defects have been discovered and pointed out by the Fire Service for urgent attention (please see CO7B attached), the building lacks disability access, is decrepit and outdated, requiring extensive work and expense to make it habitable and reflective of the office of the Electoral Commission.
The building houses precious lives of staff of the Commission and sensitive national assets such as the largest database of Ghanaians currently in the country.
The current office space is not suitable by any standards.
With regard to the contract for partitioning of the 8-floor office building, the procurement laws were scrupulously followed.
Copies of the Tender evaluation report is attached and marked CO7C.
Directors of the Commission at the head office (Finance, HR, IT and Electoral Services), and an external consultant were members of the evaluation panel.
The bid submitted by Inocon Limited was the lowest of the three bids and was recommended to the Chairperson for approval.
The Chairperson of the Commission is not and has never been a member of the tender evaluation committee and cannot therefore, influence the award of the contract.
The Chairperson is the only one authorised by the policies of the Commission to sign contracts (copy of policy attached and marked CO7D).
In any case, for the said contract that is allegedly unknown to the Commission, payment was approved and paid by the Deputy Chairperson CS without the knowledge and authorization of the Chairperson.
There is no requirement in law or in policy, for the Chairperson to seek the approval of the Commission for the execution of any contracts.
Evidence of any law or policy requiring this approval should be presented by the petitioners.
An investigation into the processes for award of the contract and a value for money assessment would be welcome as it would be based on law and policies and not motivated by ill will and pettiness.
Claim 8: “Mrs.
Charlotte Osei has been engaging in cronyism by awarding a contracts to the tune of $14,310,961 United States Dollars to her cronies for the construction of pre-fabricated District offices without recourse to the Commission.
The value of these contracts is in excess of the approved threshold by the Public Procurement Authority.
One of the contractors by name Messrs Contracts & Cads Limited is related to Mrs.
Charlotte Osei.
Upon receipt of advance mobilization under the approval of the Chairperson, the company has failed to meet the contract terms.