I want to be heard in public – Suspended PPA boss begs CHRAJ

The suspended Chief Executive Officer of the Public Procurement Authority (PPA), Adjenim Boateng Adjei, has sent a note to the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), demanding for a public hearing into the allegations of conflict of interest levelled against him as a result of a documentary by Manasseh Azure Awuni, titled ‘Contracts For Sale,’ which was aired on Joy Prime TV on Wednesday 21st August, 2019 and subsequently published by media houses across the country.

The embattled PPA boss in a letter dated Tuesday, September 17, 2019, and signed by his lawyer, Yaw Oppong, and to the Commissioner of CHRAJ, stated as follows, “Pursuant to the provisions of Regulation 6 of the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (Investigations Procedure) Regulations, 2010, C. I. 67, our Client hereby requests your outfit for a full and public hearing of the complaint”.

According to lawyers of the suspended PPA boss, “The instant request has been rendered necessary by the nature of the complaint against our Client, and the rather devastating harm, albeit unjustified, caused thereby.”

“Our Client is confident that he will be vindicated by proper and sound

enquiry into the merits of the complaint against him,” the letter further stated.

“We are of the humble opinion that the interests of justice will be better served by a public hearing of the complaint, rather than an in-camera hearing,” the letter concluded.

President Akufo Addo suspended Mr. Adjenim Boateng Adjei, following the airing of the “contracts for sale” documentary and subsequently wrote to the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) to commence an administrative enquiry and the Special Prosecutor (SP) for a criminal investigation into the allegations leveled against the PPA Boss.

Following the decision of the President, CHRAJ wrote to Adjenim Boateng Adjei, for his comments on the allegations levelled against him.

On September 5, 2019, solicitors for the PPA boss in a thirteen (13) paged document (answer of respondent) indicated in their conclusion that, “On account of all of the above, we submit that there is no evidence of any act or omission on the part of our Client supporting an allegation of having discharged his duties as a public officer for the benefit of a company he has an interest in. Complainant has not demonstrated how our Client’s personal interests interfered with the performance of his duties and functions.”

They stated further that, “The documentary was carefully constructed to negatively taint the diligent work and accomplishments by our Client in service to the nation as one of the most successful CEOs of the PPA in the history of Ghana.”

“Allegations in the documentary against our client are simply anchored on assumptions and conjectures, and betray gross unfamiliarity with the laws on public procurement in Ghana, same should be dismissed as unmeritorious,” the 13-paged response concluded.