The Special Prosecutor has dropped a hint of some incidents that hindered his investigations into the case of sacked CEO of the Public Procurement Authority (PPA), Adjenim Boateng Adjei.
In a press statement Monday, Martin Amidu said, “the resolution of the Adjenim Boateng Adjei case was taking too long to investigate because my seconded staff investigators appeared compromised. I, therefore, asked for an interim report to be submitted to the President on the referral on the Adjenim Boateng Adjei case.
“When the first draft report was submitted to me, I felt scandalised. I called a management meeting on August 10, 2020, with the investigators’ and pointed out how the incriminating evidence in their possession were inconsistent with their interim report.
“I suspended all on-going investigations in all cases except those affecting pending cases in Court. I tasked the investigators to tabulate within one week the total deposits Mr Adjei had made into his bank accounts. This is still outstanding to date.”
Mr. Adjei was suspended from office by President Akufo-Addo following an investigative documentary by Manasseh Azure Awuni, which revealed a company he co-owned, has been selling government contracts it won through single-source and restrictive tendering, to the highest bidder.
In suspending him, President Nana Akufo-Addo also directed the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) and the Office of the Special Prosecutor to investigate his appointee for conflict of interest and corruption.
Two weeks ago, CHRAJ came out with its report recommending that the President sacks then suspended PPA boss and bar him from holding any public office for the next five years.
Explaining why his work delayed, Mr Amidu catalogued happening with his investigation.
“My Office never started the investigations into the “Contracts for Sale” allegations because of the attitude of the investigators into the on-going investigation into the procurement malpractices the Office was handling before the referral from the Presidency, and this explains why Mr Manasseh Azure has still not been invited to make a witness statement.”
“Nobody should ask me about my disciplinary authority over my seconded staff because I have had none since I assumed the Office and those who needed to know have had knowledge of this fact for years. The documentary evidence is overwhelming,” he said.
He said CHRAJ ought to be commended for its work and report but stated that “The only problem with the CHRAJ report is that for some reason it understates the amounts disclosed by the bank statements from the three banks accounts of Mr Adjei exhaustively reviewed by the Auditor General for this Office.”