Parliament has found no evidence that any Member of Parliament or officer of the Parliamentary Service received money allegedly paid to influence the approval of the 2015 AKSA emergency power agreement.
The finding follows an internal administrative review commissioned by the Speaker of Parliament, Alban S.K. Bagbin, into allegations that about $46,000 was paid to individuals associated with the House in connection with the agreement.
However, the Speaker has made it clear that the outcome does not establish that no bribes were paid or absolve anyone who may have received such payments.
Addressing Parliament on Wednesday, Mr Bagbin said the report, together with supporting documents, would be forwarded to the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and other relevant investigative agencies for further examination.
The referral is expected to provide investigators with information gathered from Parliament’s records and interviews conducted during the administrative exercise.
The controversy is linked to the conviction in the United States of Asante Kwaku Berko, a former Goldman Sachs employee, for his role in facilitating bribe payments to Ghanaian officials.
Berko is awaiting sentencing in the case, which relates to the development and financing of a power generation project in Ghana by Turkish energy company AKSA.
Mr Bagbin said the review was intended to establish the circumstances surrounding Parliament’s consideration and approval of the agreement, identify those who took part in the process and determine what relevant information the institution could provide to assist investigations.
The exercise involved an examination of parliamentary records, including the Votes and Proceedings, official reports, committee documents, the report of the Committee on Mines and Energy and the resolution by which the House approved the agreement.
Some former and serving officers of the Parliamentary Service, as well as a former chairperson of the Committee on Mines and Energy, were also interviewed.
According to the Speaker, neither the documentary evidence nor the interviews established that an MP or a Parliamentary Service officer received the alleged payments.
He cautioned, however, against treating the findings as a final determination of the bribery allegations.
The review, he explained, was administrative in nature and did not have the authority to compel witnesses to appear, take evidence under oath or demand the production of documents.
It also did not have access to bank records, financial transactions or communications outside the custody of Parliament.
Mr Bagbin said the exercise was therefore not a criminal investigation and could not establish the guilt or innocence of any person implicated in the matter.
He maintained that the responsibility for investigating financial transactions and other evidence beyond Parliament’s reach rested with the appropriate law enforcement agencies.
The Speaker said the transmission of the report to the OSP and other relevant bodies was intended to enable them to pursue any further inquiries considered necessary.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
Source link
