Bagbin takes president, two others to CHRAJ

.. for misuse of public funds
The Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) is in its 10th month of investigations into complaints against president Kufuor, the Minister for Information and Presidential Affairs, Jake Obetsebi-Lamptey and Minister for Private Sector Development, Kwamena Bartels.

The investigations follow a petition fired by the minority leader in Parliament, Alban Bagbin and an open admission by the former minister for Works and Housing on the floor of Parliament that public funds were used for the external decors of the private house of the president.

The Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Nana Addo Dankwah Akufo-Addo, has so far responded to the complaints on behalf of the three respondents.

In his five-page petition, Bagbin stated that it is the contention that of the minority in Parliament “that the application of public funds for the renovation of the 1st respondent’s (president) house is illegal and amounts to an abuse of office.

“That the acceptance of the donation has the potential of compromising and corrupting the presidency and the same sins against the strict provisions of Article 284 of the 1992 Constitution.”

According to a Ghana Chronicle report, the minority leader stated that since the president received the donation, he has made no attempt to pay the necessary taxes on it as stipulated in Section 108 of the Internal Revenue Act (592).

But the Attorney General in his three-page response on behalf of the president and the two ministers prayed CHRAJ to exclude the president in the investigation.

The AG explained that the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice Act, (Act 456), sections 9 and 18 respectively, enable the Commissioner to bring an action before court in the Republic and seek any remedy that is available from that court for the enforcement of its recommendations.

“By Article 57 (5) of the Constitution, the president shall not while in office be personally liable to any civil or criminal proceedings in court.”

In parity of argument, the AG said if the recommendations of CHRAJ must be enforced by a court of law whose jurisdiction a sitting president is not personally amenable to, then there is no need subjecting him personally to the proceedings at CHRAJ, which will have to seek the enforcement of its recommendations in a court of law.

In further response, the AG said since he has already been made a party to the investigations and he is the proper person to lodge the complaint against, there is no need to add the president as a party.

According to Nana Akufo-Addo, in the case of two ministers, (Bartels and Jake), since they acted in their official capacities and are no longer holding those offices, the proper person to lodge the complaint against was him, the Attorney General.

He denied that the respondents at no material time acted as public officers in a matter touching on the renovation of the private residence of the president, adding that no renovation works in the private residence of the president were carried out using public funds.

“In any case, no renovation works were affected in the private residence of the president using public funds. The respondents say that no public funds were used or applied to the renovations that were used or applied to the renovation that were done inside the president’s house, which were paid for,” the AG said.

But the AG admitted however that public funds were used for the external improvement works’ which included security lights, observation posts, the clearing of land around the president’s house, and repair of gate following an accident involving a state vehicle running into the gate.

He said no public funds were used in the installation of the barbed wire over the wall of the house, adding, “The error made by 3rd respondent (Kwamena Bartels) was subsequently corrected in the Ministry of Works and Housing.”

Continuing, the respondents admitted that a Kumasi-based farmer, Kwame Marfo, offered to refund the expense incurred in the provision of the security lights, observation posts as well as the car park.

“Accordingly, Mr. Kwame Marfo presented a cheque for ?41million to the Ministry of Works and Housing to be paid to the Consolidated Fund to cover expenditure made out of public funds. No donation was made to the president personally and payment was not made with the knowledge and or approval of the president,” he added.

“The respondents again deny that the president has received any donation from Mr. Marfo. Moreover, no tax is required to be paid because the amount was paid into the Consolidated Fund and not put to the personal use of the president.”

Meanwhile, late last month, the matter of the renovation of the president’s house was also subject of discussion in an Ethics and Good Governance class in the United States where a Director of the US Office of Government Ethics (OGE) said that it was unthinkable that the president of the United States could commit public funds into renovating his private house.

According to him, any public servant, including the president, shall not receive any gift above $250, without declaring it and paying the appropriate taxes.

In Ghana, gift tax is recognized under our tax laws. Act 592 of the Internal Revenue Act 2000 makes it mandatory for one to pay gift tax on the total value f taxable gift within a year of assessment.

According to the law, gift tax is charged on buildings of permanent or temporary nature, land shares, bonds and other securities. It is also charged on money including foreign currency.

Some questions that are being asked outside CHRAJ investigations is whether indeed thee president should be exempted from investigations.

Legal opinions, according to the report are divided on the matter. Some legal experts say it does not matter whether the president can be prosecuted now or not and finding out the truth is the first step.

While some experts said the minority leader’s position was bogus ad without merit, majority was of the opinion that it is important for the AG to allow CHRAJ to investigate the issue and then establish guilt. They said if after investigations, the president is found guilty of abusing his office then, “when and how he will be prosecuted if needed he will be prosecuted would be a matter of time.