NRC invites Nanfuri and Assase-Gyimah

The National Reconciliation Commission on Monday said it has invited Mr Peter Nanfuri, former boss of the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI), and Captain Assase-Gyimah (RTD), to submit statements in response to testimonies which mentioned them as perpetrators of torture. Copies of the verbatim transcript of the testimonies in question have been forwarded to the two for their study, Ms Annie Anipa, the NRC Public Affairs Director said.

In an encounter with the press in Accra, Ms Anipa said following the receipt of the statements from Mr Nanfuri and Capt Assase-Gyimah, the Commissioners might recall the petitioners to afford them the opportunity to cross-examine the petitioners if they wished to do so. She said the Commission had received letters from Mr Nanfuri and Capt Assasie-Gyimah complaining that they were not offered the opportunity to attend the hearings of the cases in which they were cited as perpetrators.

Mr Nanfuri and Captain Assasie-Gyimah have also gone to the mass media with their complaints, generating public debate on the fairness of the Commission to the two. Ms Anipa said in the case involving Mr Nanfuri, the Commission had explained to him that the case in question, in which Mr Sawundi alleged he masterminded his torture at the BNI office, was reviewed in the middle of January 2003. Ms Anipa said a copy of the statement was subsequently delivered by hand to Mr Nanfuri's solicitors at Agbenetor Chambers on January 29 for his study and comments, but Mr Nanfuri informed the Commission that he did not receive the statement until January 31 2003.

"This is regrettable", she said. As for the case in which Madam Jacqueline Acquaye a baker of Aburi, who accused Lt Col Kusi of being a perpetrator in her testimony, Ms Anipa said Madam Acquaye did not name Lt Col Kusi in her written testimony. This notwithstanding, the Commission had forwarded the transcript of the relevant portions of the verbatim report of her testimony to Lt Col Kusi for his study, Ms Anipa said, adding that Lt Col Kusi had also submitted a statement to the Commission, and he would be given the opportunity to be heard publicly if it considered it necessary.

She noted that the Commission was not a court of law in the sense that it was not out to determine whether a witness was guilty or not and for that matter respondents were only invited for hearing only when they were named as perpetrators with specific allegations made against them. She said as at Friday, February 14, 2003, 70 persons, made of 61 petitioners, four respondents and five witnesses for the petitioners had appeared for public hearing since it began on January 14, 2003. She assured the public that the Commission was committed to principles of natural justice and procedural fairness, and as such, all witnesses whether presumed victims or perpetrators would be given the opportunity to tell their side of the story.

Ms Anipa said the Commission had put in place procedures to ensure that the Commission remained focused on its mandated functions. She explained that in all cases, persons whether alleged victims or perpetrators appearing for the hearing were required to fill a statement ahead of hearing. This, she said, would afford the Commission the opportunity to review the statement and determine its relevance to its mandate. Dr Ken Attafuah, the Commission's Executive Secretary, said public officials against whom allegations were made would be invited to the Commission public hearing subject to specific allegations and damage and injury to the petitioner.

He said since the Commission started taking statements in September last year, a number of people the Commission recognised as knowledgeable enough on purported role of identifiable bodies on human rights infractions, including the Students and Labour union, the Legal and traditional bodies had been invited for hearing in camera.

Mr Edward Mingle, Head of the Legal Affairs Department, said Mr Enoch Teye Mensah, MP, Ningo Prampram, cited as a perpetrator in an evidence had been served with a statement of the petitioner through the Speaker of Parliament. Mr Mingle said it was better for the purposes of records if respondents react to allegations to the Commission rather than resorting to the media.