Govt officials to face music for payment of judgement bebts
Government officials will, henceforth, be held accountable for their actions and inaction that lead to the payment of judgement debts.
Advertisement
In situations where the actions or inaction of public officials lead to unwarranted debt to the state, they must be made to refund the debt, failing which the assets of the main offenders, collaborators, accomplices and beneficiaries should be confiscated.
This was contained in a government White Paper on the recommendations of the Judgement Debt Commission presented by the Minister of Justice and Attorney-General, Mrs Marietta Brew Appiah-Opong, at a press conference in Accra on Wednesday.
Commission
President Dramani Mahama, having satisfied himself that it was in the public interest to appoint a commission of inquiry to look into payments made from public funds for and on behalf of the state by way of judgement debts, arbitration awards, negotiated settlements and related processes, set up the commission under an instrument titled, ‘Commission of Inquiry into payment of judgement debts and related processes instrument, C.I. 79 of 2012’.
The commission was composed of a Sole Commissioner, Mr Justice Yaw Appau, then a Justice of the Court of Appeal but now a Justice of the Supreme Court.
Its terms of reference, as stated in Regulation 7 of C.I. 79, were to ascertain the causes of any inordinate payments made from public funds in satisfaction of judgement debts since the 1992 Constitution came into force, ascertain the causes of any inordinate payments from public funds and financial losses arising from arbitration awards, negotiated settlements and akin processes since the 1992 Constitution came into force.
Accepted recommendations
The White Paper said the government had accepted the recommendation that to prevent the payment of judgment debts, the Civil Service should emphasise high ethical values to make it more responsive, proactive, accountable and transparent to stakeholders.
It said the government had also accepted the recommendation that Parliament pass a “Political Campaign Funding Bill” to prevent situations in which the funding of political activities and election campaigns had become a major source of corruption.
“Government accepts this recommendation but is of the view that this is to prevent corruption in political activities generally, both ruling and opposition parties, and not just corruption in public office,” it said.
It said the government had also accepted that a specialised Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) centre or unit be established within the Attorney-General’s Department to assist in the management of national debts.
Ministerial portfolio changes
Besides, the paper said frequent changes in the nomenclature of ministerial portfolios any time a different political party assumed the reins of government must cease, as “these carry with them unreasonable financial burden as a result of the movement of departments and units and even staff within a previous ministry to a new ministry carved out of the old ministry.
“Government is of the view that frequent re-alignment of ministerial portfolios and associated changes in nomenclature must be reduced to the barest minimum.
“Government further notes that this is not limited to governmental transitions from one political party to another, as such changes may also occur in the tenure of the same government,” the paper added.
Strong defence
The paper said the government had also accepted that greater attention be given to the A-G’s Department through training and having well-qualified and experienced persons with strong moral foundations and personal integrity to head the department and its units.
“Government should recruit into the A-G’s Department experienced, technically competent and committed lawyers and professionals who are in a position to review and provide expert opinion on international contract negotiations, arbitration processes and legality of all government contracts prior to execution and abrogation,” it said.
It further said the government had accepted the recommendation that there was the urgent need to give quality professional training to public servants, including regular training on Civil Service ethics, financial administration laws and procurement laws to assist them to perform their duties with professionalism, patriotism, honesty, integrity and responsibility.
It added that the government had accepted that the A-G should contract seasoned financial teams to undertake forensic investigations into judgement debt cases whenever they were brought to the A-G’s attention to be defended.
“Government is of the view that the A-G should work with the Auditor-General and other seasoned financial teams to execute these tasks,” the paper said.
Unaccepted recommendations
It indicated that the government, however, did not accept the recommendation that a legal instrument be put in place to ensure that the procurement law was religiously followed in the award of contracts, a breach of which would render the contract invalid.
“Government is of the opinion that there are enough sanctions in the existing Public Procurement Act 2003 (Act 663). The revised Public Procurement Act in the pipeline has tightened the sanctions even further,” it said.
The paper added that the government refused to accept that a legal regime be developed to ensure continuity of contracts that transcended outgoing and incoming governments.
The government, it said, further declined to embrace the idea that the role of the Audit Service should be broadened to minimise financial malfeasance in the execution and abrogation of contracts.
Furthermore, it refused to accept the recommendation that a permanent institution to play oversight role in the handling of judgement cases be established.
