CHRAJ probe: I want public hearing – PPA CEO

The Chief Executive Officer of the Public Procurement Authority (PPA), Mr Adjenim Boateng Adjei, who was suspended over the ‘Contracts For Sale’ documentary aired by investigative journalist Manasseh Azure Awuni in which he was alleged to have contravened procurement practices, has called for a public hearing by the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) into the allegations.

This was contained in a letter to the CHRAJ Commissioner signed by Mr Adjei’s lawyer, Mr Yaw Oppong and dated Tuesday, 17 September 2019.

CHRAJ is set to probe the allegations of non-compliance and contravention of Article 284 of the 1992 Constitution levelled against the suspended PPA boss.

President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo suspended Mr Adjei with immediate effect after the exposé was published and asked the Special Prosecutor, Mr Martin Amidu to probe the allegations of corruption levelled against the embattled CEO.

A statement signed by the Director of Communication at the Presidency communicating the decision by the President on Thursday, 22 August 2019, said Mr Akufo-Addo has, subsequently, “referred the allegations involving conflict of interest to the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), and those relating to potential acts of corruption to the Office of the Special Prosecutor, for prompt action”.

In a letter dated Thursday, 22 August 2019, Mr Amidu invited the CEO for questioning, saying: “You are accordingly being invited, both as the Chief Executive Officer of the Public Procurement Authority (PPA) and a Director and Shareholder of the said companies to assist in the investigation in pursuance of sections 29 and 73 of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959) and Regulation 10 of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act (Operations) Regulations, 2018 (L.I. 2374)”.

He added: “You are hereby requested to come along with all information and documents including relevant minutes of the Board relating to this investigation”.

However, Mr Adjei’s letter to CHRAJ through his lawyer stated that: “Pursuant to the provisions of Regulation 6 of the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (Investigations Procedure) Regulations, 2010, C. I. 67, our client hereby requests your outfit for a full and public hearing of the complaint”.

The letter continued that: “The instant request has been rendered necessary by the nature of the complaint against our Client, and the rather devastating harm, albeit unjustified, caused thereby.”

“Our client is confident that he will be vindicated by proper and sound enquiry into the merits of the complaint against him,” the letter further stated.

It also added that Mr Adjei and his legal representative are of “the humble opinion that the interests of justice will be better-served by a public hearing of the complaint, rather than an in-camera hearing.