Injustice at COTVET

CEO HACKED & REPLACED

The CEO of COTVET has been axed. He has been replaced without notification. The letter or release that assigned a new person to the office was not copied to the CEO as is required by best practice.

TNF can state on authority that the hacking of Mr Sebastian Deh was founded on a campaign waged by an activist of the NPP who happened to have been recruited by him despite protestation from persons in high authority from the previous administration.

It follows that the said NPP activist staged a campaign of blackmail with the collaboration of some media outlets fabricating non-existent issues against Mr Deh. As it were, the new government found it very convenient to get rid of the man who got the job through the Public Services Commission and NOT as a governmental patronage.

Why a government that promises to govern with strict adherence to due process would resort to the kind of methods at axing persons in positions which are not tied to political office holding is incredibly amazing. The principle of “audi alteram partem” could not have been lost on this government that pledges rule of law as the order of the day.

Our scouting team intercepted a strong worded rejoinder Mr Deh sent to a media house and we reproduce some excerpts from the intercepted letter below:

It bears stressing that the said publications are absolute fabrications and without any rationale or reasonable basis but rather calculated to tarnish the image of the CEO and to that extent, COTVET for a targeted purpose which factual basis can only be explained by the author.

For the avoidance of doubt we hereby present to you the following facts and in consequence demand a retraction and apology to both the organization and the CEO whose office was specifically mentioned.

We have never collected an amount of Two Hundred Thousand (200,000) Ghana Cedis in Internally Generated Funds neither have we ever dealt with USAID and SNV as mentioned in January 26 story. As at December 2016, total revenue collections amounted to GHC190, 950 from 90 TVET providers. Under our watch, all funds received are in crossed cheques and none can be cashed without going through the approved processes which can always be tracked.

The February 3, 2017 story is not only a dangerous fabrication and conjecture, it actually attempts to draw the CEO into partisan politics which he has never engaged or participated in. No COTVET vehicle has ever been used to support any Parliamentary Candidate.

Indeed, our checks reveal that the NDC parliamentary candidate in your story is the former Member of Parliament for Hohoe South and later Afajato Constituency (after the 2012 re-demarcation, by name Joseph Amenorwode mentioned did not contest elections in the year 2016. He was NEVER MP aspirant for Kpando as mentioned in the story. NDC parliamentary candidates from Kpando have always been[jbomfeh11] females. A little independent research ahead of publication would have brought this to your notice.

COTVET has no Nissan pickup with registration number GV 1715. We have Toyota pickup with the number quoted in your story in our pool vehicles used by various officers.

Perhaps your source knowing that our CEO is from Kpando conveniently sought to hazard this unsustainable slant. Again, your failure to seek our side of story has led you astray. As indicated in the story, why you could not wait for our side before going to print is a matter we find hard to fathom.

While appreciating your right to your editorial discretion and decision making we would nonetheless like to incite your recollection that it is also a constitutional duty to give us a hearing on any publication that seeks to convey a one-sided information to the public contrary to which would be most unfair to the characters in the story and the public which you seek to inform.

We hope that you would consider it fair and just to accord this rejoinder the same publicity and prominence like the publications complained of. Please be informed that we reserve the right to elect to either proceed against you at the National Media Commission or the Court of Law to vindicate our right in the face of your failure or refusal to adjust to our constitutional demand for a rejoinder.