( NDUOM and the Serious Fraud albatross Part (2))
Paa Kwesi Nduom believes strongly that his recent attempt to
exploit the brouhaha in the CPP is something worth describing as purposeful
for advancing his political career. The point needs to be made that he may be
sharply ignorant about how Ghanaians perceive him and the fact that he can’t
ignore indicators that he is gradually sinking and becoming irrelevant in
Ghanaian politics. The gradual political wafting of Nduom, a one percent
fanatic, makes one wonder whether he finds himself in a state of climacteric or
not? But one thing is certain and confirms his insignificance to even the
political party he falsefully aligns, the Convention Peoples’ Party (CPP).
But certainly his gradual meltdown as a politician demonstrates
another victorious step against Western imperialism and their covert-recruit
programme of methodical minds. Is Nduom, therefore, being exploited to be used in
a deliberate counter-socialist movement in Ghana as have gone on in many
developing countries to deliberately disrupt the progressive development of
such countries? He should begin to reason to note that he is gradually sinking
into the gutters. Readers should freely question and express with vigour the
identity, the source of wealth and the credibility of Dr. Paa Kwesi Nduom, as a
path is chart for the part (2) of analysis of serious findings made by the Serious
Fraud Office (SFO) on his engagements with the State Enterprises Commission. The
part two (2) is a continuation of the first article (please visit:
http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/artikel.php?ID=225025) which
provides a background to the current. Readers may refer to it. We should never
forget that the character of imperialism to undermine efforts by the poor
majority of Ghanaians in pursuing a progressive trend of national planning and
development through the Convention Peoples Party (CPP) has always been smacked by
infiltration of captains of naked-profiteers
has the engine of retrogression and who later find themselves running down a
socialist political party. The analysis of the findings is therefore on course.
The findings of the investigations showed that Deloitte
Haskins & Sells and Dr. Nduom who later registered a Deloitte & Touche
Consulting (West Africa) in Ghana both denied being the originators of the
first proposal. This coincidence of Deloitte Haskins and Sells and Deloitte
& Touche Consultants would later become very significant in the
investigations. Please note that in the event, none of these firms was chosen
for the job. The only interest in the list being that among the Consultants who
later worked for SEC was the name Dr. Paa Kwesi Nduom, mentioned in the
unsigned proposal from Deloitte & Touche Consultants.
Let us for now ask this simple question. What was the choice
of consultants and the modalities for the choice? Again the allegations state
that the former executive director chose all the consultants who eventually
worked on the State Owned Enterprise Reformed Programme (SOERP) all by himself
without any input from the SEC Board. As a matter of interest, the fraud
investigators found out that even though in the last meeting of the Board on 8th
October 1989 the statement that the consultancy would henceforth be carried out
by “experts on short term basis” was the last word on this issue. These consultancy
experts, according to the investigators, were not identified in the record of
that last board meeting.
Eventually, a record was discovered by the investigators
mentioning some consultants who did work for SEC on the SOERP. It mentioned
among others, Dr. Paa Kwesi Nduom, a Ghanaian resident in Virginia in the USA.
The first contract agreement dated 1st February 1991 was between
“the GOVERNMENT OF GHANA represented by its authorized representative, PNDC
Secretary and Executive Chairman of the SEC and Dr. P. Kwesi Nduom”. The
address for notice under agreement was given as; Dr. P. Kwesi Nduom, Deloitte
& Touche, 1900 M Street NW, Washington, DC 20036.
The contract was to last for 3 months in the first instance
renewable quarterly for one year from 1991. The terms of reference indicated
that Nduom was to “advice on and undertake policy studies concurrently with SEC
staff and other external Consultants
as will be agreed with, the Executive Chairman in the broad subject of
restructuring of SOEs” and other matters related thereto and explicitly stated
in the terms of reference.
Readers should slow down and carefully re-consider their
thoughts about the man Dr. Paa Kwesi Nduom. Further examination of these
contracts showed that even though they were Ghanaian contracts they had in some
cases the following curious provisions:
1. Exemptions of the consultants from paying taxes on their consultancy fees to the
revenue in Ghana
2. Per Diem payments for the consultants
3. Return Air tickets (Accra –Washington-Accra) for the consultants.
These provisions where included in
these contracts because the contract forms which were used were originally
meant to be used for consultants working on bilateral agreements. The fraud
investigators believed that the then Executive Chairman might have been convinced
by Nduom, particularly to include these provisions to enable him (Nduom) make
claim to these benefits. It eventually compelled the Executive Chairman to
apply it to other external consultants. It became apparent that this was the
basis of Dr. Nduom’s claim to be treated as a “Foreign Consultant” and
ultimately his claim to have his earnings from the consultancy transferred
abroad.
The pertinent question which arises
then is: were these benefits justified? To answer this question, the SFO
findings revealed an examination of the legal status of these consultants,
especially Dr. Paa Kwesi Nduom. The next part, part 3, will therefore aim at
providing answers.
Prof. Araba Moustache
