Accelerated criminal investigations against PPA boss – GII tells OSP, EOCO

The Ghana Integrity Initiative (GII) has called on the Special Prosecutor’s Office and the Economic and Organized Crime Bureau (EOCO) to expedite processes in the criminal investigations of the former Director General of the Public Procurement Authority (PPA), Adjenim Boateng Adjei.

The GII’s request follows the findings of the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), which found Adjem Boateng Adjei guilty of conflict of interest in the performance of his duties as former head of the PPP.

In a statement released by the GII, he commended the CHRAJ for “the impartial and thorough work carried out”.

“Expedite the criminal investigation aspect of this case and when guilt is established, the law should be made to go in full to deter all public officials charged with providing a public service and managing our national resources,” adds the statement.

The CHRAJ, after its findings following a request by the GII to investigate allegations of corruption and conflict of interest against the former PPA boss, disqualified Agyenim Boateng Adjei and two others from holding office. public.

In addition, Adjenim Boateng Adjei was ordered to declare his assets in accordance with the Public Office Holders (Declaration of Assets and Disqualification) Act 1998 (Act 550) within 3 months and also to reimburse the State an amount of GHC 5,697,530.00 within 6 months. month.

Meanwhile, Adjenim Boateng Adjei had taken the CHRAJ to court over allegations that the Commission acted in violation of natural justice and failed to grant him a fair hearing in its earlier investigations into the “contracts of employment” saga. sale”.

According to him, the CHRAJ never gave him the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses presented in the case.

“By denying me the opportunity to access, respond to and cross-examine the statements, witnesses and evidence on which the respondents relied in reaching their decision, the CHRAJ acted in violation of natural justice and does not did not give me a fair hearing,” he said in the lawsuit.

However, the Accra High Court dismissed Adjenim Boateng’s petition seeking to have the findings of the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) against him set aside.

In a judgment on Thursday, February 24, the Court presided over by Judge Elfreda Amy Dankyi refused to grant an order quashing the CHRAJ’s findings.


Mr. Adjenim Boateng was removed from office on Friday, October 30, 2020 by President Akufo-Addo after the CHRAJ ruled that he was unfit to hold public office.

The former PPA boss was arrested in a documentary by investigative journalist, Manasseh Azure Awuni, for the alleged sale of government contracts.

Following allegations in the documentary ‘Contracts for Sale’, the President suspended James Adjenim Boateng Adjei from office and subsequently referred the matter to the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) for investigation .

The documentary revealed that a company co-owned by Mr. Adjenim Boateng Adjei, TDL, sold government contracts it had won through exclusive and restrictive tenders to the highest bidder.

The CHRAJ in its final report established that, “on all the evidence, Mr. Adjenim Boateng Adjei had put himself in a position where his personal interests were in conflict with the exercise of his functions as CEO and member of the PPA Board of Directors”.

He also said the former PPA boss had abused his high position of trust. His dismissal was also accompanied by a 5-year ban on holding any public office.

The CHRAJ further stated that Mr. Adjei was unable to explain the source of the large volumes of deposits in his various bank accounts.

The Commission has analyzed data provided by the Financial Intelligence Center which puts the total transactions during the period in which Mr Adjei took office at GHS 14.8 million. This is the total figure of 4 accounts in dollars and euros held in two banks.

Mr. James Adjenim Boateng Adjei, unhappy with the overall outcome of the CHRAJ report, first approached various media outlets to express his dissatisfaction with the case. He then filed a lawsuit in a High Court in Accra challenging the CHRAJ’s decision, asking the court to revoke the president’s directive.

According to him, the CHRAJ carried out “several field visits to several places to collect evidence on which it relied to arrive at its decision”.

He added that he was never invited to attend any of these site visits, nor was he allowed to respond to or cross-examine the evidence gathered during these site visits.

“If I had the opportunity to access, respond to and cross-examine the various documents, witnesses and evidence that the CHRAJ relies on in its report, I would,” he said.

Mark M. Gagnon