Achuliwor Accused of Non-Performance

Within days of receiving Parliamentary approval as Deputy Minister of Transport and Communications, John Setuni Achuliwor ability to deliver is being called into question.

Achuliwor, who is also the Member of Parliament for Navrongo Central, is accused by the Structural Adjustment Participatory Review Initiative (SAPRI) Secretariat of breach of contract over a study report he (Achuliwor) was supposed to present for the second national SAPRI forum which took place at the Accra International Conference from May 7 to 9.

The SAPRI was launched in July 1997 as a global exercise aimed at assessing the diverse impact of Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) on the economy, society and governance in selected case study countries including Ghana.

Sources close to the SAPRI Secretariat have disclosed that an agriculture research team led by Achuliwor, who has degree in Agriculture, was paid a total of about ?45 million ($5,000 and ?10 million respectively) to undertake a SAPRI agriculture study for the second national SAPRI forum.

The team allegedly failed to present its report, and delegates at the Forum did not take kindly to it.. The forum said that the SAPRI agriculture study was so important that the report should be retrieved from the leader of the team as soon as possible and incorporated into the country report.

Some of the delegates, in a highly agitated mood, described Achuliwor's alleged failure to present the report as "scandalous", and demanded the refund of all monies advanced to him or he be prosecuted.

The Rapporteur General of the forum was immediately mandated to draft a resolution which requested Achuliwor to either submit the report "immediately" or the SAPRI Secretariat should be compelled to take all necessary steps to retrieve monies paid to him.

Professor Akilagpa Sawyer, Chairman of the Tripartite National Steering Committee (TNSC) of SAPRI, however intervened to plead with the 250 delegates to exercise restraint while the SAPRI Secretariat took steps to resolve the issue with Achuliwor.

A three-week investigation conducted by Public Agenda indicate that the issue between the SAPRI Secretariat and Achuliwor is far from resolved. Impeccable sources at the Secretariat say Achuliwor has been given up to today, May 28, to respond to a number of reminders sent to him.

He is also required to submit the signed contract between him and the TNSC which he was expected to have presented to the SAPRI Secretariat in March 2000.

Other demands on Achuliwor include receipts or records to reconcile his accounting of expenditure of the $5000 he received in March last year as the first tranche of funding of his field work.

He is also to submit accounting for the expenditure, with proper documentation, of the additional amount of ?10 million paid to him in August 2000 as part payment of the second instalment of research funds.

John Achuliwor's Agriculture Team was one of five research teams assembled in September 1999 with the original schedule of presenting their reports by December of that year to serve as working documents for the second national forum of SAPRI later in 2000. Other members of his team were Akuamoah Boateng of the University of Cape Coast and Dr. Jiereh Nurah of the Faculty of Agriculture, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technoloty.

Each team was issued with specific terms of reference and a time frame of five months within which to complete fieldwork and report writing.

Records available to Public Agenda show that all the teams consented to work within the new stipulated time frame of March to July 2000 by resubmitting a budget and a new timetable for fieldwork after the first timetable of September to December 1999 was abandoned.

Public Agenda investigations indicate that the SAPRI field research commenced in March 2000 after funds for that component of work had been secured.

In the case of Achiluwor's team, the SAPRI Secretariat paid US$5,000 as the first instalment of a total research fee of US$10,000, excluding honorarium and related payments for the agriculture research work. Records show that the Agriculture Team were first to be paid and given formal contract.

"Regrettably, the Agriculture Team reneged on the gentlemanly agreement to study and sign the contract and to submit it to the SAPRI Secretariat in March 2000, and despite constant reminders, the team has still not submitted the contract to us," says a highly placed source at the Secretariat.

Apart from being accused of failing to submit their contract, the team is also alleged to have failed to abide by the approved timetable and to comply with the auditing rules for the payment of the second instalment of the research fee.

Under the agreement, each team was required to furnish the SAPRI Secretariat with an inception and/or midterm report by May 2000, showing progress of field work investigations and indicating whether the proposed time table could hold or not.

This requirement, according to sources at the SAPRI Secretariat, was ignored by the Achiluwor's team. However, Public Agenda investigations reveal that the Agriculture Team did submit its midterm report to the Secretariat in July 2000 when, according to the programme time-table, the team was supposed to be preparing its draft research report for submission for the Second National SAPRI forum, which was originally scheduled for the end of August 2000.

"The Agriculture Team's inability to adhere to the approved timetable adversely affected the calendar for holding the Second National Forum in August 2000," an official of the Secretariat told Public Agenda, betraying his anger.

When Public Agenda contacted Achuliwor last Thursday for his reaction, he said he had a tight schedule running up to May 29, which included a trip to the Northern Region. He could therefore not grant an interview. Public Agenda has however stumbled on a letter dated May 9, 2000, and addressed to the SAPRI Secretariat in which Achuliwor admitted that, even though he has not yet presented the draft report, the SAPRI Secretariat is equally responsible for the problem.

The letter states that the genesis of the problem is the failure of the sponsors of the research to provide funding for work to commence on time. According to Achuliwor, he received the funds when the other members of his team, who are lecturers, had to attend to "their primary duties".

Achuliwor's letter says the situation was aggravated when he submitted a statement of account for the first instalment of funds from the SAPRI Secretariat as a pre-condition for the release of the next tranche. The budget for the second tranche, according to the letter, was ?33,215,000, but a cheque for only 20 million cedis was initially released.

"That cheque was retrieved within about twelve hours, and the next morning I was told the cheque would bounce for lack of funds if I presented it," the letter states.

The letter indicates that Achuliwor received another cheque for 10 million cedis, but he drew the attention of the Secretariat to the fact that the amount would barely cover outstanding payments to field staff and have little left for further work.

"Obviously, the failure to release funds on schedule has been a major factor that contributed to the delay in the completion of the work", the letter states.

Investigations conducted by Public Agenda revealed that Achiluwo's request for the release of the second instalment of funds was received by the SAPRI Secretariat in late July 2000 instead of the scheduled period of May.

But even before the SAPRI Secretariat would consider the request, it queried the accounts presented by the Agriculture Team on the first tranche. According to the Secretariat, the statement of account as submitted by the Team was not backed by any record of reconciliation, be it request for the second tranche and subsequently released ?10 million in August 2000 as part payment of the balance due.

The Secretariat explained this development thus: "The decision to release the ?10 million as part of the second tranche was to make funds available to the team to sustain fieldwork in the expectation that the agriculture team would intensify its efforts to submit the required information on the first tranche and the new budget."

Investigations conducted by Public Agenda reveal that the cheque for the ?10 million was cashed by the Agriculture Team sometime in August even though the two parties had not yet resolved the outstanding issues surrounding the first tranche.

Meanwhile, information reaching Public Agenda indicates that Achuliwor last week submitted the draft report in question to the SAPRI Secretariat, but indications are that it would be rejected. According to the Secretariat, the report does not conform to the terms of reference issued for the study.

A source at the Secretariat told Public Agenda that the status of the report is unclear, given that it is essentially a first draft that needs re-working to improve its quality and bring it in line with the terms of reference.

Another source described the draft report submitted by Achuliwor as "a hasty piece of desk-top work which does not meet the standard of a professional research work."