….Truth behind Atta Akyea’s controversial findings out soon
The investigative efforts of The Herald are shedding light on the intricate web of deceit that underpins the recently published report by Samuel Atta Akyea, Chairman of the Mines and Energy Committee of the Parliament.
In the span of two weeks, a trail of evidence has emerged, revealing a series of maneuvers that led to the final version of the report.
Shockingly, it has come to light that the initial drafts of the report contained conflicting information between the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) account and Genser’s account.
However, certain committee members aligned with the Chairman reportedly intervened, altering GNPC’s statement to align with Genser’s account.
This disturbing revelation provides substantial credence to the claims previously made by Africa Center for Energy Police (ACEP) and IMANI Center for Policy & Education regarding the Chairman’s potential bias in producing a report that disregarded factual evidence.
In a notable development, the Minister of Energy, Dr Mathew Opoku Prempeh, has distanced himself from some statements within the report, further exacerbating the credibility crisis surrounding the document signed by Mr Atta Akyea, who is the Member of Parliament for Abuakwa South in the Eastern Region.
The implications of these revelations are deeply disappointing, revealing a disconcerting collusion between parliamentary committee members and private interests that could potentially cost Ghana a staggering US$1.5 billion.
The Herald has consistently covered the conflicting stances of committee members, such as Kwabena Donkor and KT Harmond, who openly displayed their biases even before the committee commenced its investigation in October 2022.
As the story continues to unfold, The Herald, which was threatened with a subpoena by the Committee during its work, is committed to providing a comprehensive account of the individuals responsible for orchestrating the report, as well as uncovering their motivations behind such actions.
In the days to come, The Herald will publish an in-depth exposé that delves into the background and motivations of those who played a pivotal role in shaping the controversial report.
As this intricate tale of manipulation, collusion, and potential financial implications unravels, The Herald remains steadfast in its dedication to uncovering the truth and holding those responsible accountable for their actions.
The Ministry of Energy is quoted as debunking claims by the Africa Centre for Energy Policy (ACEP) and IMANI Center for Policy & Education regarding the enquiry report by the Parliamentary Select Committee on Mines and Energy pertaining to the Gas Sales Agreement between the GNPC and Genser Energy Ghana Limited.
The ACEP and IMANI in their report, among others, accused the Energy Minister, Dr Matthew Opoku Prempeh of inconsistencies when he appeared before the Parliament’s Select Committee on November 24, 2022.
In a swift rebuttal, the Ministry states that it would ordinarily not respond to the two organizations especially as it does not speak for the select committee and the report is directly in relation to that same.
The Ministry said it however finds it necessary to respond to portions of the report that relate to false accusations of wrongdoing by the two organizations on the part of the Energy Minister.
In explaining the statement by the Minister that the Ministry was not aware of the gas price negotiated between Genser and GNPC, the statement said the Minister indicated that the Ministry is not a party to the Contract and therefore could not speak to the detailed pricing components off-head, especially when the matter as at the time was in court.
He, however, informed the Committee that upon a written formal request, the Ministry will assist in providing the details of the contract, as well as any other issue of importance to the Committee.
On the issue of the Committee’s claims during the hearings that Genser was given DIDT status by the Ministry of Energy, the Ministry said Genser was first issued a DIDT by the GNGC in 2017.
Subsequently, DIDTs were issued by the Ministry to other industrial customers (ceramic manufacturing companies) as an incentive to boost gas consumption in the period of excess gas with the associated take or pay commitments.
However, it must be made clear that the DIDT policy predates the assumption of office by the current Energy Minister, who has since advocated for the removal of the DIDT policy.
The Ministry stated unequivocally that in as much as it has oversight responsibility over energy sector institutions, it is not obliged to meddle in direct contract negotiations between the sector institutions and potential investors unless the Ministry’s assistance is expressly sought.
The Energy Minister must, therefore, be understood within this context.
The statement further implored the discerning public to disregard any attempt to soil the reputation of the Energy Minister whose major preoccupation since assuming office has been to bring to the barest minimum disruptions in power supply and improve the resilience of the energy sector.
