Former Auditor-General Victimized

Having rendered invaluable services to the nation – from 1 July, 1987 (as Deputy Attorney-General); 12 April, 2001 to 29 January, 2003 (as the Acting Auditor-General), and later confirmed as the substantive Auditor-General (a position he held until 2010) – Mr. Edward Dua Agyeman, has resorted to the court of law to battle over his retirement benefits.

In response to a letter he wrote to the Chief of Staff, Office of the late President John Evans Atta Mills, Dr. Valerie E. Sawyerr, Deputy Chief of Staff - who signed a letter on behalf of the Chief of Staff dated 18 October, 2010 - stated, “Following the confirmation that Mr. Edward Dua Agyeman, former Auditor-General, was a political appointee and not a career staff of the Audit Service or any other public service and therefore not qualified for retirement benefits as provided in the Greenstreet Report; it has been decided that he should be paid the End-of-Service Benefits (ESB) applicable to political appointees i.e. three months’ salary for every completed year of service or part thereof. He is not to be paid pension since he is not qualified to receive it.”

A subsequent letter dated 30 November, 2010, and signed by Dr. Valerie E. Sawyerr, read in part, “Approval has been given for the release of an amount of Seventy-Two Thousand, Six Hundred and Forty-Nine Ghana Cedis, Thirty-Three Pesewas (GH¢72,649.33) for the payment of End-of-Service Benefits (ESB) to Mr. Edward Dua Agyeman, a retired Auditor-General.”

After acknowledging receipt of the Deputy Chief of Staff’s 18 October letter, and not satisfied with the claim by her (Deputy Chief of Staff), Mr. Dua Agyeman asserted in another letter, “However, I would like to state that upon my appointment as the Auditor-General of Ghana, it was expressly stated in my appointment letter that I ‘will be entitled to gratuity and pension as may be determined by the President on the recommendations of a committee appointed by the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the Council State.’”

Mr. Dua Agyeman, being resentful about the response by Dr. Sawyerr, wrote in a letter dated, 5 April, 2011, “I have thoroughly researched the 1992 Constitution, the Audit Service Act, 2000 (Act 584) and other laws governing the appointment in the public service, but I have not come across it anywhere that the office of the Auditor-General is a political appointment. Equally, it is not stated anywhere that to be appointed as the Auditor-General of Ghana, one must be a ‘career staff of the Audit Service or any other public service.’ Indeed, the term ‘career staff of the Audit Service’ is alien to the 1992 Constitution and the Audit Service Act: the two main laws governing the office of the Auditor-General.”

He therefore, requested the Chief of Staff to reconsider his decision and pay him his pension “as is being paid to my predecessor who was appointed under the same provisions of Article 70(1) of the 1992 Constitution.”

In spite of the persistent requests for the payment of his retirement benefits, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) government has not heeded to them (requests). The former Auditor-General has consequently taken the matter to court for redress.

In a statement of claim prepared by Akufo-Addo, Prempeh & Co. for and on behalf of Mr. Dua Agyeman, dated 15 June, 2012, the latter (Plaintiff) avers that “…by a letter dated the 5th day of May, 2003 signed by the then Minister of Finance and Economic Planning, full details of the terms and conditions attached to Plaintiff’s position were duly provided Plaintiff and same included ‘gratuity and pension as may be determined by the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the Council of State.’”

The statement claimed that Mr. Edward Dua Agyeman had made various requests to the government for a reconsideration of the view that he was a political appointee and therefore not entitled to gratuity and pension, “erroneous as it is, but all have fallen on deaf ears, with the government adamant on paying to Plaintiff End-of-Service Benefits”.

It indicated further that the holder of the position of the Auditor-General is not a political appointee since the Audit Service forms part of the public service of Ghana and the office of the Auditor-General is also a public office

“Plaintiff says that the Chinery Hesse Committee Report was presented to His Excellency the President and same took effect whilst Plaintiff was in office. Upon Plaintiff’s retirement, he is thus entitled to enjoy the facilities made available thereunder,” the statement maintained.

Reliefs being sought include a declaration that Plaintiff is entitled to the payment of gratuity and pension in accordance with the recommendations of the Reports on a Review of Facilities and Privileges for Article 71 Office Holders in 2008 (the ‘Chinery Hesse Report) with interest at the prevailing rate; an order for the payment of a monthly pension (after 15 June, 2012) equivalent to Plaintiff’s salary as adjusted from time to time “in accordance with the salary of the Auditor-General at post – which is equivalent to that of a Justice of the Court of Appeal (as is being paid to Plaintiff’s predecessor) .”

The solicitors prayed the court for the provision of one free chauffeur-driven vehicle with associated expenses to be borne by the Plaintiff and a declaration that any review of the conditions of pension payable to a former holder of the position of Auditor-General, as will be determined by the report of any Presidential Committee on Emoluments of Article 71 Office Holders, is applicable to Plaintiff.

Mr. Dua Agyeman is also claiming damages and costs.