Can Mills be exonerated? Many do not believe just as I do. The NDC and its allies are a gang of swindlers and mountebanks, bent on causing financial havoc for the nation Ghana. Questions must be asked about how the likes of deputies ministers, those from the presidency are been accused for malfeasance during their parliamentary primaries. There is the need to find out the source of the finance for their primaries campaign.

There are so many allegations about monies spent for this election that it creates doubt in the mind.

For instance, in one such allegation, it is allegedly reported that Samuel Okudzato Ablakwa bribed delegates who voted in his favor. Complaints from the five defeated aspirants, Hon. Charles Senama Hodogbey, Mr. Christian Akaho-Tay, Mr. Etse Asem, Mr. Kwame Alorvi and Mr. Elebrue are that Mr. Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa bribed the delegates to vote in his favor. If there is any truth in what is been said with regards to the amount paid, (assuming it was even GHC 1,000.00 per delegate) and his votes stood as 157 in total, it come to reason that he spent a whopping GHC 157,000.00. Calculate in the old cedis stands about 1.5 billion cedis. (1,500,000,000.00). It is further alleged that he doled out telephones and promise of MASLOC.

Reports abound that it was the trend in most constituencies. They must answer questions about the source of their funding. Could it be conjectured that the source springs from the Woyome Scandal or from payments of other judgment debts yet to be received by actually recipients?

I think it’s time all of us who see through this shabby fraud to start openly criticizing these mountebanks. .

When you piece together information about the life-style of these deputies ministers and those from the Presidency, it is glaring clear a lot of people are in this Woyome Scandal. The disturbing aspect of the Woyomegate is the recent revelation that Mills had fore-knowledge of payments. However, he sought to create the impression that he knew nothing until the revelation from the EOCO.

Granted that Mills tried to stop payment, what action he followed up with when it got to his notice that his directives had been flouted or set aside and payment effected. In law, actions bordering on commission and omission are very relevant, when a delegated authority failure to act appropriately. By commission is also understood an act performed, opposed to omission, which is the want of performance of such an act; is, when a nuisance is created by an act of commission, it may be abated without notice; but when it arises from omission, notice to remove it must be given before it is abated.

In the Delegation of Authority, just as no one person in an enterprise can do all the tasks necessary for accomplishment of goals so it is impossible, as an enterprise grows, for one person to exercise all the authority for making decisions. There is a limit to the number of persons managers can effectively supervise and make decisions. Once this limit is passed, authority must be delegated to subordinates, who will make decisions within the area of their assigned duties.

The question is how authority is delegated when decision-making power is vested in a subordinate by his superior. Clearly, superiors cannot delegate authority they do not have. It is equally clear that superiors cannot delegate all their authority without, in effect, transferring their position to their subordinates. The entire process of delegation involves four steps. They are:

1. The determination of results expected from persons in a position
2. The assignment of tasks to persons
3. The delegation of authority for accomplishing tasks
4. The holding of people responsible for the accomplishment of these tasks.

Therefore, delegation is the process that a manager follows in dividing the work assigned to him so that he performs that part, which because of his position he can perform effectively. Therefore the manager who has the responsibility in the context of Woyome Scandal is the President to whom Ghanaians have vested their authority to perform a task on their behalf.

There is a difference between delegation and work assignment. Delegation constitutes a master agent relationship while work assignment constitutes master servant relationship. The master in this context still remains the citizenry of Ghana which has delegated its authority to the President and is accountable to the people of Ghana. He, by the authority given him requires that he employs/appoints others to help him function as expected of him. Those that the President appoints to enable him function well also receives their delegated authority from the President and are accountable to the President.

An employee’s work assignment may be reflected in his job description while delegated duties may not form the part of the employee’s normal duties.

Delegation is legitimate authorization to a Manager such as a Minister or Employee (Civil Servant or Public Officer) to act in specified ways. It enables him to function independently without reference to the superior (the President) but within the limits set by the superior (the President) and the normal framework of organizational objectives, policies, rules and procedures.

The reason for explaining delegation of authority is to make aware how complicit the Presidency is involved in the whole Woyome saga. Failures of the Secretary to President, Chief of Staff, Presidential Staffers and the President’s own inability to act properly as the oath of his Office prescribes.

A person is guilty of dishonestly receiving any property which he knows to have been obtained or appropriated by any crime, if he receives, buys, or in any manner assists in the disposal of such property otherwise than with a purpose to restore it to the owner.

So if by extension Alfred Agbesi Woyome in a way contributed to Mills campaign then the President has acted criminally by dishonestly receiving.

The authority of all Ghanaians has been delegated to President; therefore by inversion he is the embodiment of and also, is the repository our authority and accountable to Ghanaians. The citizenry has every right to demand answers for acts of omissions and commissions either by the President or his appointees from the President solely and only.

The Oath of Office sworn makes him solely responsible for all infractions committed by his appointees. It is his very responsibility because he appoints and dismiss at his own discretion. Therefore those who are trying to play safe for the President must understand that, the Oath burdens the President to be accountable for all wrongs committed on his behalf. Just as all credit that emanate from actions positiveness are credited to him.

Again, it must be understood that any person or agent who by corrupt means receives or acquires, or be of the same mind to accept or attempts to acquire from any person, for himself or for any other person, any endowment or a payment or fee in return for a service as a reason or reward for doing or tolerant or lenient to do or for having done or having shown leniency to do, any action in relation to this principal’s affairs or business, or for showing or having held back from something to show favor or disfavor to any person in relation to this principal’s affairs or business has committed crime.

The President as an Associate Law Professor knows very well that the actions of the Akyena-Brantuos, the Segbefias and others at the Presidency in relation to their self-importance stance in the Woyome Scandal suppose that they are involved in something illegal or wrong hence their continuous support. Furthermore the conduct cites them as agents for Woyome with their self-importance serving as an inducement or reward for the President.

President Mills’s earlier pronouncement on the Woyome Scandal makes the President very guilty. His deception is a source for impeachment and serious indictment on both his moral and psyche integrity.

The truth is quite odd enough to need no help from pseudo-political charlatans. Who are all bent to defend Mills?

One such person is Kwesi Pratt of The Insight. Pratt claims that the President has not faulted but rather did well by taking action. Which action did Mills really took? What is Pratt talking about? Is he arguing with reference to the EOCO investigations? Or the purported directive to stop payment which never materialized?

Pratt is such a subtle and diabolical person who has an agenda to prosecute when Mills is under the microscope. He sees nothing wrong with Mills. How can Mills be exonerated from this rip-off. The scam was invented and hatched to benefit him. Every action taken concerning the debts is known to Mills. He can’t hide from this very simple truth. The truth is that he knew of the payments. Period!

Is the President trustworthy! Is there a liability?

In the criminal law, an omission, or failure to act, will constitute an actus reus (Latin for “guilty act”) and give rise to liability only when the law imposes a duty to act and the defendant is in breach of that duty.

Is the President legally responsible?
Now that it is a public knowledge that Mills knew of the scandal, he should be held accountable with his Chief of Staff, Martey Newman. The President and his Chief of Staff should be held accountable in count of conspiracy to commit fraudulent breach of trust, acts which amount to an appropriation.

The President claims he had no knowledge of how his candidacy for 2012 primaries was funded. Can it be alleged that or It means that he solicited for bribes through his agents or could it be cover up or conjectured that, it is a case involving sweeping pay to play and influence peddling declarations, including the alleged solicitation of personal benefit in exchange for an appointment in officialdom as Herbert Mensah’s tape sought to allege.

Whichever way the issue is viewed, there is gross involvement from the Presidency. The Presidency in its attempt to use the EOCO to cover the illegal has rather exposed the liability and the grand object been put forward that, the President as having no knowledge whilst having knowledge and decided to stand at the blind side of truth claiming innocence.

The quantum of monies paid under this current government is mind-boggling and must be investigated.

Therefore the question is, is Mills exonerative? Is the NDC as a Party and its hierarchy involved in the Woyome Scandal?

? Is the President trustworthy?
? Is there a liability?
? Is the President legally responsible?
? And does the President know of the unfathomable payments which have not gotten to perceived recipients?

This must be a source of worry for all discerning and well-meaning Ghanaians.

By: Nana Akwah.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.