The former head of the Public Procurement Authority (PPA), Adjenim Boateng Adjei has been banned by Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) from holding public office for the next 10 years.
He has been directed to refund GHC5,697,530 (less GHC86,000.00) to the state within six months of the date of CHRAJ’s decision.
Additionally, CHRAJ is directing him to declare his assets in accordance with Article 286 (1)(c) of the 1992 Constitution within 3 months of the CHRAJ’s decision
in accordance with the Public Office
Holder (Declaration of Assets and Disqualification) Act, 1998 (Act 550).
According to a press release issued by the Ghana Integrity Initiative (GII) in the wake of fresh findings made by CHRAJ following a petition submitted by GII to the Commission on October, 4, 2019 after the “Contract for Sale” expose by Manesseh Azure Awuni in 2019.
In the petition, GII made more than 8 allegations and requested CHRAJ to investigate same whether Mr. Adjenim Boateng Adjei and the other Members of the Board of the PPA have
allegedly been involved in corruption, conflict of interest, collusion and inappropriate conduct in violation of the Constitution and laws of Ghana for which appropriate sanctions should be applied.
GII also wantef to know that Mr. Adjenim Boateng Adjei established companies soon after he was appointed as Chief Executive Officer of the Public Procurement Authority without disclosing his interest.
Furtherance to that, GII wanted to establish whether after establishing the companies, Adjenim Boateng Adjei used his public office for private gains, which conduct is prohibited by the Constitution, the Public Procurement Act,
2003 (Act 663), and Chapter 5 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29).
GII again is finding out as to whether in order to facilitate his companies to win contracts, Mr. Adjenim Boateng Adjei either directly or indirectly disclosed procurement related information to his companies unlawfully and, amongst others, enabled a company less than three years old win high value contracts.
“That the companies that Mr. Adjenim Boateng Adjei established, allegedly subletted,
subcontracted or “sold’’ contracts awarded them by the procurement entities of the State
without the consent of the said entities.
“That by the subletting, subcontracting or “selling” of the contracts to other contractors and suppliers, Mr. Adjenim Boateng Adjei enriched himself illegally and placed himself in contravention of Article 286 of the 1992 Constitution and his actions should be investigated, he should be sanctioned, and the illegal assets he acquired should be confiscated to the State.
That the conduct of Mr. Adjenim Boateng Adjei could not have occurred without the collusion of and inappropriate conduct by the Board of the PPA, for which reason the actions of the other members of the Board should also be investigated and those found culpable should be sanctioned including recovery of money or other assets that any Board member might have acquired through the collusion and inappropriate conduct.
“That Talent Discovery Limited (TDL), a company less than 3 years old could not have won and “sold” contracts without the involvement of some public officers in those institutions whose contracts TDL won and “sold”.”
Beside A.B Adjei, GII also urged the Commission to investigate the officials of TDL, especially Thomas Amoah as well as those public officers of procurement entities for their involvement in corruption in the award of
contracts to TDL and the “sale” of those contracts. In order not to allow these persons benefit from the illegal wealth they may have acquired through corruption, investigation should be conducted and illegal wealth retrieved for the State.
Following investigation, CHRAJ’s report which GII received on February, 16 2022, CHRAJ found A.B. Adjei and Dr. Emmanuel Yaw Boakye guilty of Conflict of Interest.
According to CHRAJ, they did put themselves in positions where their personal interests conflicted with the performance of their public functions as CEO and as a Member of the Board of PPA.
“In the case of Mr. A.B. Adjei, his interest in TDL, a company with less than 3 years of existence yet won considerable public contracts and sold them without informing the awarding entity, did put him in a position of conflict of interest.
“On the part of Dr. Boakye, who was a Technical Director at the office
of the Minister of Procurement, the General Secretary of the Christo Asafo Church and a member of the PPA Board, CHRAJ found out that his involvement with the Kristo Asafo Group of Companies and his failure to recuse himself during the 25th Meeting of the Board Technical Committee to consider the Ministry of Education’s request to use single source procurement method to acquire 160 Kantanka Pick-ups vehicles from the Kantanka Automobile Limited in 2019 placed him in a conflict of interest position,” CHRAJ stated.
On the aspect of Abuse of Office, CHRAJ found them guilty, stating that “on two occasions Mr. A.B. Adjei used his office as CEO of PPA to improperly alter the decision of the Board of PPA in favour of TDL, a company in which he has personal interest.”
CHRAJ also established that, Mr. A.B. Adjei and Professor Douglas Boateng, Chairman of the PPA Board both failed to declare their assets and liabilities as required by Chapter 24 of the 1992 Constitution and Act 550.
“During CHRAJ’s investigations Professor Boateng indicated that he was in the process of complying with the law 3 years after his appointment as the Board Chairman of PPA. This is in breach of section 1 (4a & b) of Act 550 which requires that, public office holders make the declaration before taking office and after every 4 years. Section 1(4c) requires public officers to make an exit declaration of assets and liabilities, the basis for CHRAJ directing Mr. A.B. Adjei to declare his assets and liabilities within 3 months from the date of CHRAJ’s decision,”according to the report issued by GII on Friday February 25, 2022.
In conclusion, GII is calling on the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and EOCO to fast
track the criminal investigations aspect of this case and where culpability is established, the law should be made to go its full length to serve as a deterrent to all public officials entrusted with the responsibility of providing public service and managing national resources.
By Vincent Kubi