Introduction
Table of Contents
On November 25, 2024, the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) issued a significant ruling on claims related to the National Cathedral of Ghana project. The investigation, led by Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, Member of Parliament for North Tongu, looked into allegations of conflict of interest, double identity, and financial irregularities involving Reverend Kusi Boateng, also known as Kwabena Adu Gyamfi.
Reverend Kusi Boateng Cleared of Key Allegations
CHRAJ Dismisses Conflict of Interest Claims
CHRAJ ruled that Reverend Boateng’s involvement did not create conflict since JNS Talent Centre rendered no services to the National Cathedral of Ghana Secretariat. CHRAJ stated:
“The 4th Respondent as both director of the National Cathedral and the 5th Respondent (JNS Talent Centre) did not put himself in a position where his interest conflicted or was likely to conflict with the performance of his functions.”
Legitimate Nature of the GH₵2.6 Million Loan
The National Cathedral of Ghana Secretariat’s payment of GH₵2.6 million in the name of JNS Talent Centre was a major dispute.
CHRAJ confirmed that this payment was a refund for an interest-free loan extended by JNS Talent Centre to the Secretariat. Despite worries about the transaction’s casual nature, CHRAJ found no evidence of illegality, clearing Reverend Kusi Boateng of wrongdoing.
Resolution of Double Identity Allegations
Reverend Kusi Boateng, additionally, was accused of maintaining dual identities and using different official names. CHRAJ ruled that the evidence did not support allegations of double passports. The commission declined further investigation, citing the non-existence
of the name “Kusi Boateng” in passport records.
Victories for Okudzeto Ablakwa: Illegal Contracts and Accountability
Illegal Award of Cathedral Contract
One of CHRAJ’s most important findings was the declaration of illegality in the $312 million contract issued in the name of Ribade Company Limited to construct the National Cathedral of Ghana. The contract was given without Central Tender Review Committee’s approval and was deemed to contravene Ghana’s public procurement regulations.
CHRAJ concluded:
“The contract awarded to Ribade Company Ltd for the construction of the National Cathedral is illegal and void ab initio.”
Call for Investigation and Prosecution
CHRAJ also requested that the Office of the Special Prosecutor investigate the National Cathedral of Ghana’s Board of Trustees to check for potential wrongdoing. The report emphasized the importance of accountability, stating that such breaches risk harming Ghana’s international reputation.
Public Reaction and Lingering Questions
Ghanaians have had different reactions to the CHRAJ findings. Supporters of Reverend Kusi Boateng regard the dismissal of conflict of interest and double identity charges as vindication. Meanwhile, critics of the National Cathedral of Ghana project, including Okudzeto Ablakwa, saw the verdict on procurement irregularities as a victory for transparency and anti-corruption initiatives.
Future of the National Cathedral of Ghana Project
The National Cathedral, envisioned as a symbol of unity and national pride, remains controversial. With CHRAJ’s findings calling for further investigations, the project’s future hangs in the balance. Questions surrounding governance, transparency, and adherence to legal procedures dominate the public discourse.
As Ghanaians peruse the 165-page CHRAJ report, the case serves as a reminder of the value of honesty and accountability in managing public projects.
You may also want to read: Bank of Ghana’s The Bank Square: The Tallest Office Building in Ghana, Redefining Skylines – 2024
What was CHRAJ’s ruling on conflict of interest involving Reverend Kusi Boateng?
CHRAJ ruled that Reverend Kusi Boateng did not breach conflict of interest laws. It found that his dual role as a director of JNS Talent Centre and the National Cathedral project did not create a conflict since JNS Talent Centre did not render any services to the Secretariat.
What did CHRAJ conclude about the GH₵2.6 million payment to JNS Talent Centre?
CHRAJ concluded that the GH₵2.6 million payment was a refund for an interest-free loan extended by JNS Talent Centre to the National Cathedral Secretariat. While it expressed reservations about the informal nature of the transaction, no wrongdoing was found.
What was the outcome of the double identity allegations against Reverend Kusi Boateng?
CHRAJ ruled that there was no evidence to support the allegations of double passports or double identity. The commission declined further investigation into the matter.
What were the key findings regarding the contract awarded to Ribade Company Limited?
CHRAJ declared the $312 million contract awarded to Ribade Company Limited as illegal. The contract violated Ghana’s procurement laws by bypassing the required approval from the Central Tender Review Committee.
What actions did CHRAJ recommend following its findings?
CHRAJ recommended that the Office of the Special Prosecutor investigate the National Cathedral’s Board of Trustees for possible corruption in awarding the contract to Ribade Company Limited.
How has the public reacted to CHRAJ’s report on the National Cathedral?
The report has drawn mixed reactions. Supporters of Reverend Kusi Boateng see the rulings on conflict of interest and double identity as vindication, while critics of the National Cathedral project view the findings on procurement violations as a win for transparency and accountability.
