2008 anti-corruption campaign platform for Ghana collapses in Norway
Edward Osom

Just when you thought those flimsy allegations of corruption charges against President Kufuor were stacked up at center stage ready for the 2008 elections, here comes a more potent one from Norway to upset it all.

Ex President Rawlings, his wife and P. V. Obeng have been allegedly mentioned in an ongoing corruption and bribery case in Norway.

To put the preceding in context, Rawlings, on the basis of sheer rumor, has often referred to President Kufuor as the most corrupt politician; even to the point of naming him Ata Ayi, after one of the most notorious armed robbers in Ghana’s history.

Now it seems the Norway case may make Rawlings’ accusation against the president look piddling in comparison. The former President who, on two occasions of bloody revolutions, shot his way to political prominence, has been linked to a bribery scandal unfolding in a court in Norway.

In that court case, SCANCEN, the mother company of GHACEM, Ghana’s major manufacturer of cement, is suing a former employee, a Norwegian, for embezzlement and the man has been talking.

He is Tor Egil Kjelsaas. The case against him began in October 2005, and it has led to the uncovering of a huge bribery scheme, alleged to involve some West African Heads of States. The scheme is said to have granted SCANCEM and her associate companies a huge monopoly on cement manufacturing and distribution in certain parts of Africa.

Tor Kjelsaas was the point man for SCANCEM in Africa and it was through his agency that the bribery monies were distributed.

So far two bank accounts, one at Unibank S.A. Luxemburg and the other at Barclays Bank S.A. in Geneva, Switzerland, have been identified as depositories for paid bribes to the Ghanaian interest.

It is alleged that during the regime of Jerry Rawlings, between 1993 and 1998 alone, a total of US$4,150 million was paid into these depositories; US$1,690,000 was paid into the Barclays Bank account while the sum of US$2,460,000 went into the Unibank account during the same period.

Court proceedings show that SCANCEM claims that the money in the Barclays Bank account went to favor Nana Konadu Agyeman-Rawlings, the then First Lady of Ghana, and the sum in the Unibank account went to P.V. Obeng, once a top advisor to the Rawlings regime.

P. V. Obeng is reported, by an investigative reporter for a Norwegian magazine, to have admitted that the monies paid into his account were for "purely consultancy services."

This open admission admits one thing; that one of the overseas accounts exists. The charges by SCACEM, therefore, cannot be entirely empty or frivolous at this point.

But, this admission, as a defense strategy, cannot meet the smell test because of conflict of interest. P. V. Obeng’s position as a special advisor to a sitting president, during the same period the charges refer to, should not have allowed such consultancy.

SCANCEM, through a representative in Ghana, has insisted in court that bribes were paid during this period to high officials, including Rawlings, his wife and P. V. Obeng. Since the latter has spoken, we should expect to hear from the former president and his wife soon.

The wait for Rawlings to speak should also allow Ghanaians the opportunity to compare Kufuor’s supposed criminality, as charged by Rawlings, to the alleged corruption implied in the ongoing case in Norway.

Were we to use Rawlings’ standard test for corruption, which usually was rumor based, we would enact instant and bloody punishment, as witnessed by the victims of the 1981 coup. Rawlings would have been pronounced guilty and dead by now.

However, we believe in due process of the law. The trial in Norway must proceed and the government of Ghana should be duty bound to ask for a representation in that court, preferably by a competent Norwegian lawyer.

In Ghana, we should busy ourselves with comparisons of “Kufuor Gate” and this “Cement Gate” which has a good chance to become a political albatross for Rawlings and the NDC in 2008.

The worse offence for “Kufuor Gate” would have been a charge of influence peddling against his son. Even so, the loans to build the hotel were legally made and were traceable to local banks, not to some undisclosed offshore accounts.

“Cement Gate”, however, presents a different face. The possible charges against Rawlings and company would be corruption, influence peddling, abuse of the powers of the presidency and economic subversion of the state.

The money for “Kufuor Gate” went to build a hotel, a real asset which will continue to augment the economy of the nation for as long as its doors remain open. Not so for “Cement Gate”.

In “Cement Gate”, the gains were personal and were until lately hidden in offshore accounts.  Even after a successful or unsuccessful trial, the benefits to Ghana would still remain murky; the only certainty to glean would be the monies siphoned from so many Ghanaians for bribes paid into the offshore accounts.

But the most galling point about “Cement gate” would the meaning of it all. The so called moral crusaders, the protectors of the revolutionary way of life, who are now the paid enforcers of corruption.

So each time you bought a bag of cement or paid rent during the periods covering the J.J’s revolution and administration, part of the proceeds went to corrupt officials you ignorantly believed were virtuous. Could there be an irony that hurts more than this?

Edward Osom, Washington, DC, July 24, 2007