Godwin Edudzi Tamekloe, Director of Legal Affairs for the National Democratic Congress (NDC), has strongly defended President John Dramani Mahama’s decision to establish the Operation Recover All Loots (ORAL) committee, dismissing calls for a Commission of Inquiry as legally flawed.
Speaking on TV3’s The Key Points on February 8, Tamekloe argued that the ORAL committee was a more effective mechanism for ensuring accountability and avoiding the pitfalls of immunity that could arise under a Commission of Inquiry.
Tamekloe explained that a Commission of Inquiry, similar to the one used in the Ghana@50 investigation, would have imposed legal limitations on its outcomes, potentially shielding individuals implicated in corruption from prosecution. “Had the President chosen the Commission of Inquiry route, legal limits would have been placed on the outcome, potentially providing immunity to individuals whose conduct may be in question. That is why, based on sound legal reasoning, this approach was not taken,” he stated.
The establishment of ORAL has sparked widespread debate, with critics questioning its effectiveness compared to a more formal Commission of Inquiry. However, Tamekloe clarified that the committee’s mandate is not to conduct criminal investigations but to gather critical information that will inform the President’s next steps. “This is not an investigative body capable of taking caution statements. It is an information-gathering process, which will guide the President’s next steps,” he said.
The ORAL committee is seen as a fulfillment of Mahama’s campaign promise to tackle corruption and recover misappropriated state funds. Tamekloe emphasized that the committee’s findings, once submitted, could be forwarded to the Attorney General for further action. “The President made a campaign promise to implement ORAL, and this committee is part of the preparatory steps. On Monday, when the final report is submitted, the President will decide the next course of action, which could include forwarding the findings to the Attorney General,” he noted.
The move comes amid mounting public pressure on Mahama’s administration to address allegations of corruption and financial mismanagement. Anti-corruption advocates have long called for decisive action, and the ORAL committee is positioned as a critical step toward achieving accountability. Tamekloe highlighted the strategic advantage of the committee’s approach, stating, “The President can choose to forward the report to the Attorney-General without making any public statements. This strategy allows for a more effective and legally sound approach.”
While the ORAL committee has its supporters, some legal and political analysts remain skeptical, arguing that a Commission of Inquiry would have provided a more transparent and structured process. Nevertheless, Tamekloe’s defense underscores the administration’s commitment to pursuing accountability through what it views as a more legally robust framework.
As the ORAL committee prepares to submit its final report, all eyes are on President Mahama’s next move. Will the findings lead to prosecutions, or will they become another footnote in Ghana’s long struggle against corruption? For now, the debate over the best path to accountability continues, with the ORAL committee at the center of the conversation.
