Another foreign country, the United States, has given Ghana a big assistance in the fight against corruption.
In a case involving former Goldman Sachs executive and former Managing Director of the Tema Oil Refinery (TOR) Asante Berko and Turkey’s AKSA Energy, a US jury has delivered a guilty verdict.
It has also emerged that Ghanaian law enforcement officials participated in the case.
It is alleged that monies were paid to government officials and Members of Parliament to influence the signing of the deal and its approval by Parliament.
If proven, such payments would raise serious questions about the integrity of the transaction and whether the inflated cost of the deal ultimately imposed an unfair burden on Ghanaian taxpayers.
Disturbingly, Goldman Sachs withdrew from the process after discovering that Mr Berko had allegedly gone rogue.
The company reportedly forced him to resign and referred the matter to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Yet, despite these developments, Ghana proceeded with the deal, which was subsequently approved by Parliament.
Even more troubling is the fact that, in 2024, Mr Berko was appointed Chief Executive Officer of the Tema Oil Refinery (TOR).
One cannot help but ask: Did the Akufo-Addo government conduct adequate due diligence before making that appointment?
The Berko-AKSA case unfortunately echoes other corruption scandals that have tainted Ghana’s public life.
In 2007, a Norwegian court heard allegations that SCANCEM had paid US$4 million in bribes to Ghanaian officials, including allegations involving former President Jerry John Rawlings. The Mabey & Johnson and Bombardier cases also raised serious questions about corruption in public procurement and government contracts.
It would appear that, despite the many slogans associated with the fight against corruption, “probity and accountability,” “zero tolerance,” “protecting the public purse” and, more recently, “ORAL”, we remain reluctant to confront corruption decisively.
Article 35(8) of the 1992 Constitution states, “The State shall take steps to eradicate corrupt practices and abuse of power.” Article 218(e) and other provisions also provide a constitutional basis for combating corruption.
Yet we continue to create more rules, regulations, and institutions without adequately enforcing the ones already in existence.
Indeed, the Constitutional Review Committee’s recently released report has proposed the establishment of an Independent Anti-Corruption and Ethics Commission, which would absorb the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP). The government has accepted the proposal.
But if existing institutions are not empowered or allowed to enforce the law effectively, what assurance is there that another institution will produce a different result? Without genuine political will and enforcement, the new body, like those before it, may achieve little. Enkosi aga!
This approach to fighting corruption reminds me of a young man who had been wooing a beautiful maiden for a long time. One day, the lady called him and said, “Krakye, I want to visit you this week. When will you be home?”
The young man began to stammer: “I don’t know, I’m not sure, hmmm, haaa.”
That, in many ways, appears to be Ghana’s attitude towards corruption. We know what needs to be done, but when the moment comes to act, we hesitate.
Our problem is not primarily our Constitution or our laws. Our problem is enforcement.
The anti-corruption fight has been paralysed by partisanship, “what-aboutism” and the unfortunate reality that the watchman and the thief are sometimes the same—or closely related.
Our Constitution is three times the length of the United States Constitution. We have more than enough laws, institutions and provisions to mount a serious fight against corruption. What we lack is the consistent political will to enforce them without fear or favour.
When I sent the news about the Berko-AKSA case to Speaker Alban Bagbin, he responded, “I was the majority leader then. I will refer to the membership of the Committee on Energy to trigger an investigation into this matter.”
That is welcome.
We certainly need to know why and how Ghanaian institutions failed to prevent or address the alleged wrongdoing surrounding the transaction. But while Parliament conducts its inquiry, the anti-corruption agencies and the Attorney-General must also get to work.
If investigations establish that identifiable public officials committed crimes, they must be held accountable.
Consistent with the principles of “probity and accountability” and the promise of ORAL, let us see meaningful accountability.
As President John Evans Atta Mills did in the Mabey & Johnson case, there should also be consequences for public officials where credible evidence establishes wrongdoing. Where appropriate, officials should step aside while investigations are conducted, rather than remain in positions where they may influence the process.
As Nigeria’s celebrated anti-corruption czar, Nuhu Ribadu, once put it: “Fighting corruption is a war. In a war, you go for the big targets.”
Let us go after them.
May God bless Ghana.
