Comment On Press Statement Presented By Waterville

13th March, 2012

COMMENT ON PRESS STATEMENT PRESENTED TO MEDIA BY WATERVILLE HOLDINGS [BVI] LIMITED AND SUBSEQUENT RELATED MEDIA REPORTAGE

Our attention has been drawn to a Press Statement presented to the media by Waterville Holdings [BVI] Limited and the subsequent media reportage in relation to it. The reportage that we have been made privy to raises some issues that we believe require necessary clarification.

To set the records straight, the facts relating to Mr. Alfred Woyome’s relationship with Waterville are as follows:

1. That, in early 2005, Waterville was recommended and referred to Alfred Woyome by BIC [Building Industry Consultants], who were supervisory Consultants to the CAN 2008 Stadia and related projects. The fact is that Waterville did not employ Mr. Woyome as they purport to say but the operational arrangement was in the form of a syndicate where Mr. Woyome separately and independent of M-Powapak, and Vamed/Waterville agreed to collectively work on the project in question.

2. In the first instance, in order for VAMED/Waterville to win the bid for the construction and refurbishment of CAN 2008 stadia and allied projects [the Cobalt 60 Plant and Tissue culture facility, Six hospitals and one Wellness Center] the KEY CONDITION PRECEDENT set by the Government of Ghana was that the successful party [or company] must exhibit evidence of secured funding. Consequently, Vamed/Waterville contracted Mr. Woyome to make all relevant arrangements to syndicate the quantum of the amount required which, in this case, was about €1.16 billion, at great cost. The evidence of this secured funding procured by Mr. Woyome for purposes of the Vamed/Waterville tender eventually won them the bid. Thus, this pre-condition was met by the singular work done by Alfred Woyome!

3. It is CRUCIAL to note that without the evidence of the secured funding as procured, through syndication, by Mr. Woyome, Vamed/Waterville would have lost the said bid. Now, before Mr. Woyome could be paid his fees for his financial engineering for the procurement of the said facility towards the success of the bid by Vamed/Waterville, the Government of Ghana unilaterally terminated the process. It is for the above work that Mr. Woyome sued for professional fees and costs and secured his Judgment.

4. In the second instance, Government, after the termination of the original bid, again re-awarded the rehabilitation of the Accra, Kumasi and El Wak Stadia to Waterville [please note that, by this time, Vamed had left the scene without executing the contract for the construction of the 6 Hospital projects they had signed with Government] when the Chinese could not do it. Waterville contracted Mr. Alfred Woyome to source for funding for these projects which he did by securing it from the HSBC Bank in New York. Mr. Woyome duly procured the funding for Waterville and was paid for this particular service.

5. The relationship between Alfred Woyome and Waterville is a matter which is part of proceedings that are before the courts.

Brief Supplementary Background

When the initial process under which Waterville was granted concurrent approval by the Central Tender Review Board [CTRB], approval which obligated the Government of Ghana to consummate all attendant contracts relating to this process under Section 65[4] of the Procurement Act of the Republic of Ghana, was truncated by the Government of Ghana, Waterville was re-awarded the Accra, Kumasi and El Wak stadia projects leaving Mr. Alfred Woyome’s professional work [in obtaining the secured funding, as advertised in the international bid placed by the Government of Ghana, and as ASCERTAINED BY THE FINANCE SUB-COMMITTEE SET UP UNDER THE SAME ACT], UNRECOGNIZED AND NOT CATERED FOR.

It was on the basis of Mr. Alfred Woyome’s procuring the secured funding [with all its conditionality] that Waterville was given the indicated concurrent approval. Obviously, securing this funding facility placed an obligation on the Government of Ghana to pay the attendant fees and costs incurred in securing the funding. Waterville, in 2010, affirmed Mr. Woyome’s rights to claim in a letter to the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, which letter was also copied to Mr. Woyome.

It is these professional fees and costs that Mr. Woyome claimed from the Government of Ghana. The Judgment Debt awarded was the outcome of negotiations between the Government of Ghana and Mr. Alfred Woyome.

It is important that this distinction and clarity is presented to the good people of Ghana since it is our observation that the public has been substantially misinformed about the facts surrounding this matter.

We respectfully request that you PUBLISH THIS STATEMENT IN FULL and thank you for your time and kind attention.

Alfred Woyome Communication Team