Former Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Alex Mould, in court today testified that he has not come across any documentation indicating that Minority Leader Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson was authorized by the Finance Minister to write two letters in the trial around their alleged involvement in the purchase of defective ambulances for the state.
These letters, addressed to the Bank of Ghana and the Controller and Accountant General, respectively, requested the establishment of letters of credit for the procurement of ambulances, per reports by MyJoyOnline.com.
One of the letters sought to establish letters of credit in favor of Big Sea Trading Company, the designated supplier of ambulances to the state. The other letter authorized the release of over ¢800,000 cedis to the Minister for Health to cover bank charges related to the procurement of 50 Mercedes Benz ambulances and related services.
But the Attorney General, Godfred Yeboah Dame, argued that Dr. Forson’s actions violated the agreement governing the ambulance purchase.
Dame stated that the agreement prohibited advance payment, and the purchase price of €15,800,000.00 was supposed to be paid through an irrevocable and transferable letter of credit from the Government of Ghana’s bankers. The payment for each batch of 50 ambulances was to be made upon delivery, following the submission of specific documents.
The Attorney General further contended that Dr. Forson directed the letters of credit to be charged to the Ministry of Health’s budget, which went against the parliamentary approval for ambulance funding.
During his testimony, Alex Mould informed the court that deputy ministers often write letters on behalf of their respective ministers. However, he stated that he had not seen any authorization document indicating that Dr. Ato Forson had the authority to write the aforementioned letters.
“I therefore find it odd that A1 (Ato Forson) who in his capacity as deputy minister, assisted the minister and who wielded neither constitutional nor statutory powers could be held responsible where none of the persons in copy including the minister have denied what he signed.
“Based on the above, and in the light of experience. It is my candid view that it is fallacious for the republic to allege that A1 authorised letters of credit out of which payment amounting to €2 million were made to Big Sea without due course and authorisation,” he stated.
The AG Godfred Yeboah Dame however probed the matter further.
AG: “You realise that after the first accused signed exhibit A, he proceeded to sign exhibit B2 dated 12th August addressed to the controller and accountant general.”
Mr Mould: “Yes he did.”
AG: “Now you see that, the first accused referred to his own earlier letter, is that not correct?”
Mr. Mould: “Yes, he referred to the Ministry of Finance letter”
AG: “Do you see any attachments?”
Answer: “No”
Ag: “Did you come by any information or document showing authorisation by the minister?”
Mr Mould: “No my lady, not in this instance.”
Mr Mould insisted the letters cannot form a basis for a charge of causing financial loss to the state.
“Any claim that exhibit A has resulted in causing financial loss to the republic is not only wrong but demonstrates a misunderstanding of an LC. I say in an LC transaction, it is an LC applicant and paying bank who authorise payment.”
The AG however insisted that under the agreement, the LC was to the means by which payment was made. Mr. Mould agreed.
AG: You agree that the letters of credit are the means by which payment was made for the transaction in issue”
Mr. Mould” Yes my lady. It is the means by which payment will be made on behalf of the applicant to the beneficiary”
The AG will continue with the cross examination of Mr Mould on July 6, myjoyonlie.com adds.