The Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) in Ghana has received a formal petition requesting an investigation into the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana Gold Board, Sammy Gyamfi, over allegations of corruption. The petition, submitted by Ghanaian citizen Eric Dumenu Akatsi, stems from a widely circulated video showing Mr. Gyamfi handing an undisclosed sum of US dollar notes to Nana Agradaa, a self-proclaimed evangelist. The incident sparked public outcry and raised concerns about the source of the funds and the propriety of Mr. Gyamfi’s actions, particularly given his position as a public official. While Mr. Gyamfi has issued an apology and acknowledged the regrettable nature of the incident, the public’s questions about potential financial impropriety remain unanswered. This incident acts as the catalyst for the petition, which also incorporates broader allegations of suspicious financial activity.
Mr. Akatsi’s petition, addressed to CHRAJ Commissioner Joseph Whittal, alleges that the video incident, combined with what he describes as reliable intelligence regarding unusual bank transactions, points to a pattern of potentially corrupt activities by Mr. Gyamfi, who also serves as the National Communications Officer for the National Democratic Congress (NDC). The petition specifically highlights Mr. Gyamfi’s alleged ownership of two private bank accounts with Consolidated Bank Ghana – one denominated in US dollars and the other in Ghanaian cedis. Mr. Akatsi claims these accounts hold in excess of GHS100 million, an amount he alleges was not present before Mr. Gyamfi assumed his role at the Ghana Gold Board. The petition argues that this rapid accumulation of wealth, alongside the documented exchange of dollars with Nana Agradaa, strongly suggests corrupt practices.
The petitioner contends that the timing of the significant increase in funds in Mr. Gyamfi’s accounts, coinciding with his appointment to the Ghana Gold Board, raises serious questions about the legitimacy of these financial gains. The petition emphasizes the need for a thorough investigation to determine the source of these funds and to establish whether they are linked to any form of illicit activity. By highlighting the incident with Nana Agradaa alongside the allegations of unexplained wealth, the petition seeks to establish a pattern of behavior that warrants further scrutiny by CHRAJ. The petitioner explicitly states that the confluence of these events leads to the “irresistible conclusion” that Mr. Gyamfi has engaged in suspected corruption.
Mr. Akatsi’s petition invokes Articles 41(f) and 218(e) of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana to underscore the validity of his request and to emphasize CHRAJ’s mandate to investigate such matters in the public interest. Article 41(f) of the Constitution outlines the duty of every citizen to protect and preserve public property and expose and combat misuse and waste of public funds and property. This article provides a constitutional basis for citizens to raise concerns about potential corruption involving public officials. Article 218(e) grants CHRAJ the power to investigate complaints of violations of fundamental human rights and freedoms, injustice, corruption, abuse of power, and unfair treatment of any person by a public officer in the exercise of his official duties.
The petition calls upon CHRAJ to exercise its investigative powers to ascertain the veracity of the allegations and determine whether Mr. Gyamfi has indeed engaged in corrupt practices. The petitioner argues that this investigation is crucial not only to address the specific allegations against Mr. Gyamfi but also to uphold public trust and accountability within the government. The outcome of the investigation will have significant implications for Mr. Gyamfi’s career and could potentially lead to legal repercussions if the allegations are substantiated. Moreover, it will send a message about the seriousness with which Ghana addresses concerns related to corruption within its public institutions.
The petition’s reliance on constitutional provisions strengthens its legal foundation and underscores the importance of addressing the allegations through the appropriate investigative channels. It remains to be seen how CHRAJ will respond to the petition and what the subsequent investigation, if initiated, will uncover. The case has garnered significant public attention and the outcome will undoubtedly be closely scrutinized by the Ghanaian public and media. It represents a test of Ghana’s anti-corruption mechanisms and its commitment to ensuring accountability among its public officials. The investigation, and its subsequent findings, will contribute to the ongoing conversation about transparency and integrity within the Ghanaian government.
