Private legal practitioner, Martin Kpebu is calling for support from Ghanaians to petition parliament to cite Health Minister Kwaku Agyeman-Manu for perjury.
Speaking on Joy FM's 'NewsFile' Martin Kpebu said the Health Minister Kwaku Agyeman-Manu lied that there was no payment in the Sputnik V deal.
This he believes forms the foundation of his petition to cite the Minister for perjury.
"What the Health Minister, Kwaku Agyeman-Manu did at the Committee amounts to perjury. We have to hold him to account."
He further explained that the letter from the Ministry which was later sent to the committee probing the deal and indicating that there was a payment made for the deal but seems to suggest the Health Minister was not aware does not even help Kwaku Agyeman-Manu's case at all.
"The point is that the letter does not carry the Health Minister's case far. It makes his case worst. Let's not go there. It's a cock and bull story."
Managing Editor of the New Crusading Guide, Kweku Baako has also called for the resignation of Health Minister Kwaku Agyeman-Manu.
Â
The parliamentary committee that investigated the Sputnik V vaccine contract has recommended that Finance Ministry take steps to recover $2,850,000 (or GH¢16,331,640) being the cost of the Sputnik-V vaccines that were proposed to be procured.
The Committee says it found that the Ministry of Health did not seek approval from the Board of Public Procurement Authority (PPA) under Sections 40 and 41 of Act 663 before signing the Agreements.
READ ALSO :Â Sputnik V committee directs Finance Ministry to recover $2.85m
The Ministry, however, applied for ratification under Section 90(3) (c) of the Act. Which has still not been granted.
The Committee also found that PPA has not concluded its investigations into the matter.
"The Health Minister [Kwaku Agyeman Manu] said that he did that because of the exigencies of the time when COVID-19 posed public health crisis with highest fatalities and there was urgent global search for vaccines and at that material time the Agreements were signed, all government to government sources had failed as the bilateral sources had communicated to the Ministry that they would only be able to deliver in August 2021. Suffice to say that the bilateral sources did not include Russia since Ghana had no such arrangement with Russia," the Committee said in its concluding remarks.
The Committee found that the Ministry dealt with the Private Office of His Highness Al Maktoum and S. L. Global.
The two entities were appointed by the Aurugulf Health Investment (Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates), to be both Agents and Distributors of the Sputnik-V COVID-19 Vaccines in Ghana. Clearly using middlemen for the purchase and distribution of the vaccine.
Cost of the Vaccines
The Committee found that the amount of $19.00 was the agreed price of the vaccine under the Ministry’s Agreement with Al Maktoum and US$18.50 under the Agreement with S. L. Global which was originally $26 per dose. The Committee found that the ex-factory price of the Sputnik-V Vaccine was $10.
The Minister explained that the prices achieved under the two Agreements included the cost of documentation, shipping, packaging, logistics and expenses in relation to transportation of the vaccine from its place of origin to Ghana.
The Committee found that the Ministry entered into the two Agreements without cabinet approval but only based on a Ministerial decision, having regard to the advice of the COVID-19 Emergency Operating Committee.
Payment to Messrs Al Maktoum
The Committee found that the amount of US$2,850,000.00 (representing 50% of the contract sum of US$5,700,000.00) has been paid to Messrs Al Maktoum and this translates into the Cedi equivalent of GH¢16,331,640.00 converted at the then prevailing exchange rate of US$1 to GH¢5.73 whereas the minister said he had no knowledge of payment under oath.
Recommendations
Based on the aforementioned findings, the Committee recommends as follows:
Issues Relating to Article 181(5) of the Constitution
The Committee is of the opinion that even if the situation in the country at the time the Agreement was signed, was that of an emergency, due process of law should have been followed because Parliament would have treated the issue with the urgency it deserved and the appropriate action would have been taken accordingly. The Agreement would have been taken under certificate of urgency in accordance with the Standing Orders and the practices of the House.
The point must also be made that, even if it was an emergency, the Minister should have found time to communicate effectively and engage with the Committee on Health.
The extensive engagement would have saved the Ministry from the negative reactions from the citizenry and some Members of Parliament.
The Committee, therefore, recommends that, in future, any such transaction, whether local or international, be subjected to broader stakeholder consultations and should be taken through due process of law including Parliamentary approval. Other Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) should take a cue from the recommendation, not only in the case of Agreements but also on issues relating to policies and programmes to be implemented.
Â
Â