The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) in Ghana is conducting an in-depth investigation into a controversial revenue assurance contract between the Ghana Airports Company Limited (GACL) and Evatex, a previously dormant company. The investigation centers around allegations of procurement irregularities and potential misconduct by former GACL Board Chair, Paul Adom-Otchere. The contract, which has since been terminated, guaranteed Evatex 16% of any GACL revenue exceeding a predetermined benchmark, raising concerns about potential windfall profits for Evatex regardless of their actual contribution to revenue growth. The OSP is scrutinizing Adom-Otchere’s role in the contract award, suspecting he may have exerted undue influence and bypassed established procurement procedures.
A key area of the investigation revolves around the process by which Evatex secured the contract. Initially, a company named Devnest presented a proposal to the GACL Board. However, the contract was ultimately awarded to Evatex, a company registered in the mining sector with a single employee and no apparent prior experience in revenue assurance. The OSP is investigating the lack of documentation explaining this substitution, as there is no evidence of a corporate relationship between Devnest and Evatex beyond a letter of introduction. This raises questions about why Evatex was chosen over Devnest and whether proper due diligence was conducted. Furthermore, Evatex’s qualifications are under scrutiny, given its dormant status, lack of tax compliance, and absence of the required license from the Institute of Chartered Accountants.
The OSP’s investigation also focuses on the contract’s structure, which potentially allowed Evatex to profit from revenue increases unrelated to their efforts, such as natural growth in airport traffic or tariff adjustments. The timing of the contract signing, just days before the 2024 national elections, and discrepancies between the contract date and related paperwork have raised further suspicions of procedural irregularities and potential backdating. Allegations of direct intervention by Adom-Otchere, including introducing Devnest, directing single-source procurement, and instructing the award to Evatex despite the Board’s initial approval of Devnest, are central to the OSP’s investigation.
The OSP is scrutinizing Adom-Otchere’s alleged involvement in several key stages of the contract process. He is accused of initially introducing Devnest to the Board, subsequently directing management to pursue single-source procurement, and ultimately instructing GACL staff to award the contract to Evatex, despite the Board’s prior approval of Devnest. Adding to the intrigue, the owner of Evatex is reportedly a close associate of Adom-Otchere. While Adom-Otchere has publicly denied these allegations and claimed ignorance of the contract signing, the OSP is investigating the veracity of his statements and the extent of his influence in the process. The investigation is also examining the role of the GACL Managing Director, Yvonne Nana Afriyie Opare, who signed the contract.
The investigation is likely to expand in the coming days to include questioning of the GACL Managing Director, Yvonne Nana Afriyie Opare. Opare, who has remained in her position despite a change in government, is expected to be called in for questioning imminently. Her testimony will be crucial in understanding the circumstances surrounding the contract signing and the extent to which she acted under the direction of the Board or Adom-Otchere specifically. The OSP will be particularly interested in clarifying who authorized the signing of the contract and whether undue pressure was exerted on Opare by the Board or other parties.
The OSP’s investigation into the GACL-Evatex contract raises fundamental questions about procurement practices, corporate governance, and potential abuse of power within state-owned enterprises. The focus on Adom-Otchere’s alleged actions highlights the importance of transparency and accountability among high-ranking officials. The outcome of this investigation could have significant implications for future procurement processes and corporate governance standards within Ghana’s public sector. Furthermore, the investigation’s findings will be closely watched by the public and could have political ramifications depending on the extent of any wrongdoing uncovered. The case underscores the need for strong oversight mechanisms to prevent irregularities and ensure the integrity of public procurement processes.
