Bright Simons
Policy analyst Bright Simons has questioned claims by Ghana’s Narcotics Control Commission (NACOC) that the recent cocaine seizure at Beirut’s Rafic Hariri International Airport was the result of a joint controlled delivery operation with Lebanese authorities.
In a statement on Sunday, NACOC announced that the arrest in Beirut followed a controlled delivery operation involving drug law enforcement authorities in Ghana and Lebanon, intended to identify and apprehend persons involved at both ends of the drug supply chain.
But Simons indicates details from Lebanon tell a different story.
According to him, Lebanese reports are clear that the seizure was handled by Lebanon’s General Security and Customs, not the narcotics branch. In Lebanon, he notes, the anti-narcotics branch is a unit of the Internal Security Force (ISF), which is prominently mentioned and issues its own statement whenever it participates in joint operations.
He cited recent joint operations involving Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait and the UAE where Lebanon’s Central Office for Drug Control was explicitly mentioned.
In the current case, Simons said, not once in statements and interviews by Beirut Customs was cooperation with Ghanaian authorities mentioned.
He pointed out that Lebanese Customs in Beirut said the operation was carried out in coordination with the Lebanese General Security, following security monitoring and intelligence gathering.
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, he added, praised coordination and information exchange between the two Lebanese agencies, with no mention of Ghana, unlike other joint-operation cases. The biggest red flag, Simons said, was “THE BRIBE.”
He said Lebanese Customs sources told LBCI that the passenger is suspected of paying a bribe at Accra Airport to get his two suitcases through.
Simons argued that if NACOC had already decided to let the bags pass as part of a controlled delivery, it would have been under Ghanaian security supervision as per Act 1019 and would have been authorised for clearance by the Director-General of NACOC, with GACL Security alerted ahead of baggage screening.” How then could someone have asked for a bribe?” he questioned.
He further stated that Lebanon has matching rules, with Lebanon’s Law 673/1998 under Articles 214, 219 and 220 requiring the Counter-Narcotics branch of the ISF to be directly involved in controlled delivery scenarios.
Simons questioned why Lebanese investigators would describe the Accra leg as facilitated by corruption if their Ghanaian partners had alerted them in advance that it was being supervised and allowed through.
While Lebanese reports confirm there was foreknowledge that the Syrian drug mule was suspicious and that Lebanese Customs spoke to Ghanaian Customs and Aviation Security, Simons said this is not evidence of controlled delivery as there was no mention of NACOC, the only Ghanaian security organisation authorised to allow controlled delivery.
He noted that prior awareness of the drug mule appears linked to the fact that the man had already entered Lebanon from Syria through the Masnaa land crossing and was under surveillance by Lebanese security before travelling from Beirut to Accra and returning days later.
Simons added that video of the search and briefings thereafter shows Lebanese authorities were surprised by the packaging and hidden compartments, adjusting X-ray settings and remarking about the surprise of finding airtags.
If NACOC had supervised transit, he argued, Lebanese Customs would have received a detailed advance briefing according to protocol.
A Daily Guide Report