Findings Of the ADHOC Committee for The Supply of Sputnik- V Vaccines

NEWS COMMENTARY ON THE FINDINGS OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE THAT INVESTIGATED THE PROCUREMENT CONTRACT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF GHANA AND HIS HIGHNESS SHEIKH AHMED DALMOOK AL MAKTOUM AND S L GLOBAL FOR THE SUPPLY OF SPUTNIK-V COVID-19 VACCINES.

A report by a Norwegian newspaper published on June 3 this year, alleges that the government of Ghana signed a contract for the purchase of Sputnik V vaccine with an Emirati official which it said was involved in the controversial Ameri power deal and a Norwegian citizen charged with money laundering in Norway.  The contract worth almost 6 million dollars was said to have been signed on 9th March, six days after the Sheikh arrived in the country with a sample of 16 thousand doses to demonstrate that he had access to the vaccines and could therefore supply to the country. The newspaper alleges that the country was being ripped off because the 19 dollars per dose agreed on was almost double of the unit price of 10 dollars per dose at the factory. Ever since the news broke, the minority in parliament has been on the heals of the minister of health Kweku Agyeman Manu. The minority succeeded through a private member’s motion sponsored by the minority leader Haruna Iddrisu and six other minority MPs to get the House to constitute a nine-member adhoc committee to investigate the contract and issues surrounding it.

Of critical concern to the minority and other critics are the cost per dose, procurement processes, lack of parliamentary approval and the reliance on a middle man instead of dealing directly with the manufacturers or their government. Chairman of the health committee, Dr. Nana Ayew Afriyie vehemently defended the deal and justified the cost. He also argued that unlike the COVAX facility which is dealing directly with the government without the use of middlemen, the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) and the procurement of the Sputnik-V vaccines does not deal directly with governments. It is significant to state that per the terms of the contract, the sheik was to deliver 300 thousand doses worth 5.7 million dollars as the first consignment.

However, apart from the sample of 16 thousand doses and additional four thousand making a total of 20 thousand doses he brought on the day of signing the contract, he failed to deliver any single dose in addition. At the investigative committee hearing, it became apparent and the report also suggested, that the contract with the Sheikh was an international business transaction and needed a prior parliamentary approval, which was never sought. It is also curious that the minister did not seek approval from cabinet either. Worse still, he did not follow the Public Procurement Act but went ahead to single sourced. Another curious development was the revelation that just less than 24 hours to the commencement of the investigative hearing, the Sheikh wrote to terminate the contract.  In his responses before the committee, Mr. Kweku Agyeman Manu explained that he was in a desperate and helpless situation with the management of the Covid numbers as the deaths were increasing. He further stated that those were not normal times and he was seriously in a situation that did not make him to think properly. This is rather interesting and leaves one to wonder if Mr. Agyeman Manu, a seasoned accountant could accept such a justification from any other person in his previous position as the chairman of the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament.

Certainly, the emergency situation created by the pandemic and the urgency required, did not constitute sufficient reasons to bypass all the steps that are required by law. The constitution and the standing orders of Parliament contemplated such emergency situations and made provisions for dealing with them. Those provisions allow for bills and agreements to be taken under a certificate of urgency, by which they could be taken through all the stages and approved in a matter of hours. The most serious revelation was the fact that the Committee found that the amount of two point right five million dollars (representing 50% of the contract sum of 5.7 million dollars for 300,000 dozes) has been paid to Messrs Al Maktoum and this translates into the cedi equivalent of GH¢16,331,640.00 converted at the then prevailing exchange rate of US$1 to ¢5.73. This is despite the fact that the Sheikh did not deliver the required doses.

Again, the health minister testifying before the committee under oath, stated that to the best of his knowledge, no amount was paid to the Sheikh under the transaction. He even suggested that the Sheikh was only issued with Letters of Credit which he could only clear if he delivers the vaccines and the ministry gives an attestation to that effect. Contrary to this claim, the Health Minister was copied in a letter dated 31st March 2021 from Acting Controller and Accountant-General to the Bank of Ghana requesting BOG to make the advance payment to Al Maktoum from the Health Ministry’s accounts. That letter also referred to a 25th March 2021 letter from the Ministry of Finance, obviously authorising the payment, and which must have been copied to the Health Minister. At this juncture, one wonders if the minister should not be held for perjury, having said something under oath which he knew or ought to have known to be false.

Regrettably, the ad-hoc committee failed or neglected to provide for specific actions against the health minister for breaching all the laid down rules in the award of contracts and possible perjury. It is not sufficient for the committee to recommend to the finance ministry to retrieve the money paid to the Sheikh. There is the need for some punitive sanctions. There are a lot of precedents in this country. The former chairperson of the Electoral Commission Charlotte Osei was investigated and removed from office under the current government for procurement breaches. Businessman Alfred Agbesi Woyome is being haunted because he was paid a judgement debt for a breach of contract which did not have a parliamentary approval. Past government officials including Victor Selormey and Dan Abodakpui were prosecuted and sentenced to prison with hard labour for causing financial loss to the state due to some of these reasons.

As the saying goes, what is good for the goose is good for the gander and he who calls for equity must come with clean hands. Indeed, if we are to win the war against corruption, which has been the major bane on our development, then we must be ruthless and uncompromising on these issues. It is good that parliament itself recognized the difficiencies in the recommendations of the committee and could not take a decision on it. Hopefully when the house resumes, our MPs will do what is just and honorable and that which is worthy of praise. It is however important to stress that the first step and the least action is for the health minister to resign or be removed from office by the president. The minister is obviously not alone in this, apparently other officials were involved in processing and paying the monies, without demanding and seeing the requisite approvals; those officials ought to be similarly sanctioned.

In the latest correspondences, the health ministry wrote to the Sheikh and the Sheikh also wrote back agreeing to return the remaining amount of the non-supplied dozes from the 50 percent advance transferred to him. Even though it is a good step, it is problematic because the contract is absolutely unconstitutional and to that extent null and void. In that regard, no public fund can or should be expended on such a contract and any pessawa that will be paid to the Sheikh will amount to a financial loss to the state. The conversation must therefore start from the retrieval of the full amount.  Yes, there is evidence that the 20 thousand dozes were supplied and administered on field officials who helped the Ghana Statistical Service in the recent population and housing census. However, previously decided court cases suggested that once the contract is determined to be illegal or unconstitutional, any amount spent on it constitute a financial loss to the state, irrespective of what benefits the nation derived from the said illegal transaction. As the lawyers will say, you cannot put something on nothing.

By Bubu Klinogo, A Journalist