Adom-Otchere must respond to procurement allegations – Amaliba

Legal practitioner and Director-General of the National Road Safety Authority, Abraham Amaliba, has called on Paul Adom-Otchere to respond to the issues raised by the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP).

He criticised Adom-Otchere for framing the investigation as a personal grudge rather than engaging with the substantive allegations.

Speaking during an appearance on JoyNews’ Newsfile on Saturday, August 2, Mr Amaliba argued that Adom-Otchere’s attempt to frame the OSP’s invitation as an act of vendetta due to his known friction with Special Prosecutor Kissi Agyebeng was a distraction from the critical legal questions at hand.

“He should stop hiding behind the narrative that he has personal issues with Kissi Agyebeng and respond to the facts,” Mr Amaliba said. “Is he being investigated because he wrote critical articles about the Special Prosecutor? No. That’s not the basis.”

He pointed out that the concerns raised by the OSP are rooted in allegations of procurement breaches, specifically involving a single-sourced contract that was reportedly awarded and later altered in a questionable manner.

“This is not about political witch-hunting. It’s about accountability. The fundamental issue is simple—was there a single-source procurement, and if so, how did a different company end up executing the contract?” he questioned.

Mr Amaliba challenged Adom-Otchere’s earlier stance that the matter fell squarely within the purview of management and not the board, describing that explanation as flawed.

“Board members are central to major decisions in any corporate body. They oversee and influence financial and strategic direction. You can’t completely disassociate the board from a transaction of this nature,” he asserted.

He further cited the principle of strict liability under the Procurement Act, indicating that board members could be held liable regardless of intent or direct involvement. “The law doesn’t require you to be the one who signed the contract. As Board Chair, you are still accountable.”

Amaliba also questioned the credibility of the company involved in the deal, suggesting they lacked the necessary experience and professional credentials at the time the contract was awarded.

“If this company had been truly qualified, revenue assurance would’ve already featured in their object clause. That clause was only amended after the deal. This shows a lack of readiness from day one,” he noted.

He also expressed concern about the Public Procurement Authority’s (PPA) decision to approve the sole-sourced deal, asking how a firm not licensed by the Institute of Chartered Accountants could be cleared to perform such a technical role.

“When sole-sourcing is approved, it’s assumed the vendor is uniquely equipped. But this company didn’t even meet the basic requirements,” he added.

Mr Amaliba concluded by urging public officials to embrace transparency. “This idea of personal grudges being the reason for scrutiny is a red herring. Let’s focus on the facts and stop the diversions.”