Former
National Coordinator of the Ghana Youth Employment and Entrepreneurial
Agency (GYEEDA), Hon. Abuga Pele, has hit back at critics who have
accused him of being part of the alleged corruption and financial
malfeasance cited in the report by the five-member ministerial committee
that investigated his outfit.
The committee’s report is said to
gravely indict Hon. Abuga Pele. He is alleged to have paid monies to a
tune of 2.3 million dollars to a consultant who did not work to merit
such an amount.
He is also accused of involving himself in other
dubious activities when he was head of GYEEDA, formerly the National
Youth Employment Programme (NYEP).
Though Hon. Abuga Pele has
discounted the claims, he appears dissatisfied and gob smacked that his
name was included in the report submitted to the Presidency for
appropriate sanctions to be meted out to the culprits.
Addressing
the issue in an interview with Radio Gold on Thursday, he stressed that
there was no way he could have engaged in any financial
misappropriation since every activity he undertook in paying the monies
was sanctioned by the Ministry of Employment.
He further
intimated that he did not dole out the monies on the blind side of the
Ministry because the said consultant at the center of the malfeasance
worked with Management Development and Productive Institute (MDPI)
which, he added is a governmental consultancy under the Ministry.
Though
he admitted administering the monies, he maintained that “they were
paid only when some tasks had been done and these were submitted, which
were then forwarded to the Ministry and a Memo which was critically
examined before any payment was being done…So, I am a bit surprised…”
He further explained the circumstances that led to his indictment in the GYEEDA report.
“It
was when I was at post within that period that some of these contracts
that have been signed were brought to me and once I was still at post, I
had to witness them. I didn’t expect somebody else who probably will
come in later on to come and witnessed them. So, that was the condition
under which I witnessed them. And I was not even asked this question by
the Committee anyway.
“The second aspect has to do with the
payment of 2.3 million to a supposed consultant for no work done…This
was so serious that I expected that at least if it is true that this is
the report or this what is contained in the report that is yet to be
made public, at least the Committee…would have asked me; why did you
authorize payment to this tune?”
He therefore issued a stern
warning to his critics to stop the character assassination, saying
“supposing it turns out that this is not true, how are they going to
retrieve the loss of image and the insults that have hurled all over the
place against me?”
|
|
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment