Justice Srem Sai, a renowned private legal practitioner, and law lecturer at the University Of Ghana School of Law, has raised critical questions about the motives and legal foundations underlying President Akufo-Addo’s actions in the Airbus bribery scandal, specifically concerning the President’s decision of lodging an official compliant against former President John Dramani Mahama.
Justice Sai’s analysis centered on several key points that challenge the narrative built around the scandal, particularly the decision by President Akufo-Addo to file a criminal complaint against former President John Dramani Mahama with the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP).
“We know that it was President Akufo Addo, himself, who accused JM of receiving a bribe from Airbus SE – he personally instructed his Secretary (his relative) to file a criminal complaint at the OSP. We also know that his complaint was based solely on the UK and the US court judgments and the deferred prosecution agreements which were signed between the UK and US prosecutors and Airbus SE”.
Justice Srem Sai, Private Legal Practitioner
Justice Sai further pointed out that a thorough examination of these court documents reveals that they do not contain any direct evidence of bribery involving former President John Dramani Mahama, who was Ghana’s Vice President at the time of the transactions in question.
He argued that a “respectable reading” of the UK and US court judgments shows no concrete evidence that the former President received bribes from Airbus SE.
Furthermore, the law lecturer at the University of Ghana School of Law contended that there is no indication that Ghana suffered any financial loss as a result of the transactions involving Airbus, a point that significantly undermines the basis for the criminal complaint.
One of the most contentious aspects of the Airbus scandal has been the identification of “Government Official 1” mentioned in the court documents.
Justice Sai asserted that President Akufo-Addo, at his high office, was well aware that the reference pointed to former President John Dramani Mahama before he ordered the criminal complaint to be filed.
He emphasized that despite this knowledge, the President proceeded with the complaint, which he suggests was not motivated by concrete evidence of wrongdoing but by the mere fact that Mr Mahama’s relative was involved in the transaction as an agent for Airbus.
Implications of Conflict of Interest and Corruption
Justice Sai’s critique extended to the implications of the President’s actions regarding conflict of interest and corruption.
He contended that President Akufo-Addo’s decision to file the complaint, based primarily on Mr Mahama’s familial connection to the Airbus transaction, indicates that the President is well aware of the dangers posed by conflicts of interest in public office.
“What does this tell us? It tells 2 things: (A) It tells us that President Akufo Addo is not ignorant of the rules of conflict of interest; and, certainly, not ignorant that involving a relative in public office business promotes corruption”.
Justice Srem Sai, aPrivate Legal Practitioner
This understanding is critical, Sai argued, as it underscores the principle that the involvement of a relative in government business can be grounds for initiating a criminal process.
Additionally, Justice Srem Sai’s analysis suggested that the complaint filed by President Akufo-Addo could set a precedent where the mere involvement of a relative of a high-ranking government official in a government transaction is sufficient to trigger a criminal investigation.
This, he implied, is a potentially dangerous development that could be used to target political opponents without substantive evidence of actual wrongdoing.
By questioning the motives and legal foundations of President Akufo-Addo’s complaint, Justice Sai highlighted the potential misuse of the criminal justice process in a politically charged context.
READ ALSO: Gospel Singer Shares Distressing Story of Losing His 7-Month-Old Baby
