TAMALE METROPOLITAN ASSEMBLY
Suhudou Ni Lebigimsim (Peace & Development)

TAMALE M.C.E. VINDICATED BY THE ASSEMBLY's PRCC

Source:  |  Date Published: Mon Mar 19 20:47:22 UTC 2018

  • TAMALE M.C.E. VINDICATED BY THE ASSEMBLYTAMALE M.C.E. VINDICATED BY THE ASSEMBLY's PRCC
THE PUBLIC RELATIONS AND COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE OF THE ASSEMBLY(PRCC) RECENTLY SUBMITTED IT'S REPORT ON A COMPLAINT SENT TO IT BY THE HON.METROPOLITAN CHIEF EXECUTIVE , HON. IDDRISU MUSAH.


THE M.C.E. HAD COMPLAINED OF A LITANY OF ALLEGATIONS AGAINSTHIM BY 30 MEMBERS OF THE ASSEMBLY . THE PRCC IN ITS REPORT CLEARED THE MCE OFALL ACCUSATIONS. read more from the report below. 


    PUBLIC RELATIONS & COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE

    REPORT ON A COMPLAINT SUBMITTED TO THE COMMITTEE BYTHE HON. METROPOLITAN CHIEF EXECUTIVE (IDDRISU MUSAH) ON ALLEGED MISCONDUCT ANDIN PROPRIETY CONTAINED IN A PETITION BY SOME MEMBERS OF THE ASSEMBLY.

    MARCH, 2018

    PREAMBLE

    Onthe 25th of October, 2017, the Metropolitan Assembly, through theMetropolitan Co-ordinating Director received a written resolution for thepassage of a vote of no confidence on the Metropolitan Chief Executive (MCE),Hon. Iddrisu Musah. The petition was signed by thirty (30) members of theAssembly and contained six (6) point allegations against the MCE which theyclaimed constituted grounds for the passage of a vote of no confidence in theMetropolitan Chief Executive.

    Subsequentto this, a letter titled: NOTIFICATIONOF WITHDRAWAL dated 7th November, 2017 and addressed to thePresiding Member of the Assembly who also doubles as the Chair for the PRCC andsigned by Hon. Mohammed A. Abukari, member for Sabonjida E/A, Hon. MohammedKwame Murtala, member for Banvim E/Aand Hon. Abukari Issah, member for BilpelaE/A on behalf of the entire petitioners was received. This letter indicatedthree (3) main reasons for the withdrawal of the petition.  These were:

    1.      2.      3.      Onthe heels of the Notification of Withdrawal letter was the receipt of personal writtenletters of withdrawals and apology from five (5) Members of the Assembly whowere originally part of the thirty (30) petitioners. The five (5) are Hon.Salifu Mohammed Mutala, Member for Mohiyebihi E/A, Hon. Fuseini Ukasha, Memberfor Buglanfong E/A, Hon. Dawuda Abdul Wahab, Member for Yong-Dakpemyili E/A,Hon. Zakaria Mustapha, Member for Kotingli E/A and Hon. Haruna Mashud, Memberfor Gumbihini North E/A.

    RECEIPT OF WRITTEN COMPLAINT FROM HON MCE (IDDRISUMUSAH)

    Onthe 17th of November, 2017, not enthused by the action taken by the30 Assembly members, the Public Relations and Complaints Committee (PRCC) ofthe Assembly received a written complaint from the Chief Executive of theTamale Metropolitan Assembly requesting the committee to investigate those allegationslevelled against him in the withdrawn petition to establish the truth orotherwise of those allegations. According to him, it was important for all theissues raised in the withdrawn petition to be thoroughly investigated by thePRCC to clear his name; since the reasons provided in the withdrawal letter didnot exonerate him of the allegations leveled against him by the petitioners.

    Actingon the strength of the written complaint from the MCE and within the law andrelevant portions provided for in the Local Governance Act (936) of 2016,specifically section 27 which establishes and spells out the functions of thePublic Relations and Complaints Committee (PRCC) proceeded to act on thecomplaint in the interest of justice and fairness.

    Thecommittee convened its maiden meeting after its re-constitution on Thursday, 23rdNovember, 2017 during which the petitioners who claimed they had withdrawntheir earlier petition were each served letters dated 21st November,2017 (see exhibit 1) inviting them to make an appearance to assist thecommittee in its work. They all turned down the invitation and instead wrote acollective letterdated 22nd November, 2018 signed on behalf of thegroup by Hon. Mohammed A. Abukari (Sabonjida E/A), Hon. Alhaji Mohammed TijaniIbrahim (Jakarayili E/A) and Hon. Alhassan Yakubu cataloguing reasons why theywill not honor the invitation (see attachment).

    Eventhough the Committee viewed the action and stand taken by the remainingsponsors of the early collection of allegations as an affront and a directchallenge to its authority, did not relent in its efforts to deal with thecomplaint before it from the Metropolitan Chief Executive. Subsequently, secondinvitation letters dated 24th November, 2018(see exhibit 2) weresent to the petitioners to make an appearance before the committee failure ofwhich the committee will proceed to do its work. Again, the remaining sponsorsof the allegations in a written communication dated 27th November,2018 to the committeecataloged a litany of untenable reasons why they will notmake yet another appearance.

     

    COMMENCEMENT OF HEARING BY THE PRCC

    Beforethe commencement of investigations into the complaint of the Hon. MCE, threemembers of the committee, namely Hon. Alhaji Yahaya Muhammed, Member forDakpemah, Hon. Alhaji Kwame Mohammed Mutala, Member for Banvim and Hon.Alhassan Imoro, Member for Pagazaa/Tugu who are interested parties to thematter under investigation rescused themselves and therefore are not associatedwith this report, till the beginning to end.

    OnMonday, 11th December, 2017 the Metropolitan Chief Executive, Hon.Iddrisu Musah, the complainant appeared before the committee to assist thecommittee in its work. The committee quizzed the Hon. MCE on all theallegations leveled against him as contained in the supposed withdrawnpetition. The committee painstakingly interrogated the issues and got thefollowing responses from the Hon. Metropolitan Chief Executive:

    1.      ,the Hon. MCE responded as follows: “This is not true and in fact, I reject thisaccusation as it’s an attempt to tarnish my reputation”. He denied everawarding any contract without due process. According to him, between the periodof his assumption of office as the Metropolitan Chief Executive and his appearancebefore the committee, he had only awarded four (4) contracts all of which arewithin the threshold of a Metropolitan Chief Executive in respect of categoryF2 for Metropolitan Assemblies procurement thresholds as stipulated in thePublic Procurement (Amended) Act 2016(914) (see exhibit 3). The four (4)projects are: Land clearing for Gbabshei Yam Market – Seventy-two ThousandGhana Cedis (GH. 72,000.00), Rehabilitation of Guunayili Livestock Market – OneHundred and Six Thousand Ghana Cedis (GH.106, 000.00), Construction of SteelBridge at Sagnarigu-Dungu – Seventy-Nine Thousand Five Hundred and Thirty-fourGhana Cedis (GH. 79,534.00) and paving works at the Banvim-Lana’s palace –Ninety-Three Thousand Five Hundred and Forty-one Ghana Cedis (93,541.00).

    2.      the Hon. MCE’s response is as follows:“Idisagree with that assertion because it is not grounded in fact. My communityconnect is a clear demonstration of my respectful and all-inclusive policy. Ichallenge them to come clear on this. In any case, how can anyone claim Idisregard Hon. Assembly members when I wholeheartedly accepted and agreed inprinciple to increase the sitting allowances of members by almost a hundredpercent and privately on my own assisted some Hon. Members”.

    3.     this was theHon. MCE’s response: “I find this accusation/allegation as vague since they(accusers) failed to provide or demonstrate any proof to that effect.”“On oneoccasion, I had to personally apologize to Hon. Iddrisu Nuhu, Member forVictory Cinema when he felt unhappy over my inability to properly communicateto him in respect of the siting of a toilet project in his Electoral Area”.

    4.      theHon. Metropolitan Chief Executive’s response was as follows: “Hon. Chairman,again this is incorrect. If I had anything to hide from honorable members, Iwould have hidden the various Public Private Partnership (PPP) agreementsbetween the Assembly and some companies from them”. “Because of my open nature,I had to make copies of some previous PPP agreements that were entered intoduring the tenure of my immediate predecessor when Hon. Members said theyhadn’t seen any of such documents. 

    5.     

    (a)  the Hon. MCErespondedas follows: “This is half true and half false”. “Half false because,the two were properly engaged by the Assembly and duly offered appointmentletters just like all other casual workers of the Assembly and it is half truebecause, they are paid a monthly wage/salary of GH.1, 400.00 each.” (Seeexhibit 4).

    (b)  the Hon. Mce respondedas follows: “This is false and therefore incorrect because the currenttaskforce was not constituted by me”. “I came into office and met them”. “Ihave actually only added forty (40) to thenumber which everyone will agree withme such a decision ensured the success of the decongestion exercise that wecarried out”.

    6.      , the Hon. Mce responded as follows:“This is inaccurate because I have demonstrated deep association with Hon.Members to the extent that, I personally honor social programs such asoutdooring organized by Hon. Members when I am invited.

    TheHonorable MCE used the occasion of his appearance before the committee to urgethe committee to verify or authenticate the signatures of some of those whosigned the earlier petition against him.

    APPEARANCE OF FIVE (5) OTHER MEMBERS BEFORE THECOMMITTEE

    Fiveother members who had earlier associated themselves with the withdrawn petitionalso appeared before the committee to assist it in its work. They were Hon.Fuseini Okasha, Member for Buglan-fong Electoral Area, Hon. Dawuda Abdul-Wahab,Member for Yong-Dakpemyili Electoral, Hon. Zakaria Mustapha, Member forKootingli Electoral Area, Hon. Haruna Mashud, Member for Gumbihini NorthElectoral Area and last but not the least, Hon. Salifu Mohammed Mutala, Memberfor Mohiyebihi Electoral Area.

    Theyeach strongly made the point that, the Public Relations and ComplaintsCommittee (PRCC) is and should always be the most appropriate forum for theresolution of disputes of this nature. According to them they have no personalscores with the MCE. Hon. Dawuda Abdul-Wahab, Member for Yong-Dakpemyili forinstance said he did not critically examine the allegations raised in thewithdrawn petition before appending his signature.

    Hon.Haruna Mashud, Member for Gumbihini North on his part said Hon. Alhaji IbrahimMohammed Tijani, Member for Jakarayili, Hon. Sulemana Alhassan, Member forLamashegu North andHon. Iddrisu Ibrahim, Member for Changni came to hishouse atabout 12 midnight during the peak of events and said to him he Hon. Mashud alsoneeded to also append his signature to their petition because ‘there wasconfusion at the Assembly and that all members of the Assembly including bothNDC and NPP members of the house were in support of the petition”. According toHon. Mashud, a single sheet of paper containing names with signatures was thengiven to him to append his signature. This sheet of paper according to Hon.Haruna Mashud did not have any attachment. Like Hon. Mashud, Hon. SalifuMohammed Mutala, Member for Mohiyebihi also told the committee he was alsotricked to append his signature to the withdrawn petition.          

    FINDINGS

    The following findings have beenestablished by the committee after investigations:

    1.     The committeeupon investigations and reference to the procurement Act663 (ACT 2003) and thePublic Procurement Act (Amendment) Act 2016 (Act 914) established that, dueprocess was followed in the award of all the four contracts referred to and asubject of investigation. Each one of them fell within the permissible thresholdof up to 75,000 Ghana Cedis for Goods, up to 75,000 Ghana Cedis for Servicesand up to 125,000 for Works for Head of Entity (in this case the MetropolitanChief Executive) for Metropolitan Assemblies (see exhibit 3 again). Thecommittee also established that, for the sake of continuity of the paving ofselected palaces started by his predecessor, the forecourt of the Banvim-Lana’spalace which was also earmarked for paving but could not be done before theexit of the immediate past MCE had to be carried out. The committee was alsoable to establish the fact that, rehabilitation of the Gunaayili LivestockMarket, clearing of site for the Yam market at Gbabshei and paving of theforecourt of the Bavim-lana’s palace projects for instance were allpre-financed by the contractors.

    2.     the committee is unable to accept orreject that assertion since those who alleged did not cease the opportunity toshow evidence of this conduct that they accuse the MCE of.

    3.     the committeeestablished that, since no proof or evidence was adduced from any individual orgroups the committee treated this allegation with the contempt it deserves.

    4.     thecommittee again did not have the benefit of adducing any shred of evidence fromthose who levelled the accusation therefore the committee treated thisallegation with the contempt it deserves.

    5.     

    (a)  the committeeestablished that, the two young men, Mohammed A. Razak Wumpini and Abubakari K.Rafiq were properly engaged temporarily by management of the Assembly with appointmentletters signed by Mr. Gaspard Dery, immediate past Metropolitan Co-ordinatingDirector with a monthly salary of One Thousand Four Hundred Ghana Cedis each, effective1st April, 2017 (refer to exhibit 4 again).

    (b)  ,the committee upon further investigations established that, there was alreadyan existing taskforce with a membership of 21 at the time the Hon. MCE assumedoffice as per records made available to the committee by the finance office ofthe Assembly. This was further confirmed by Hon. Mohammed Hafiz (Dema-Naa), whountil recently was leader and supervising Head of the taskforce. Indeed, thecommittee upheld that,the Hon. MCE’s assertion that he only added forty (40) tothe existing number, bringing the total to sixty-one (61). The committee istherefore of the view that it’s a false claim to the effect that, Hon. IddrisuMusah, the current Metropolitan Chief Executive recruited a total of 61 taskforcemembers which was non-functioning and yet draws salary.

    6.     Onthe allegation/accusation of “acting very hostile towards Honorable Members ofthe Assembly, the committee established that,since those who alleged could not cease the opportunity to present theirevidence to assist the committee in its work, the committee has no option butto treat this allegation with the contempt it deserves.

    CONCLUSIONS

    Onthe basis of the findings in respect of the withdrawn petition on passing avote of no confidence on the Hon. MCE, the PRCC wish to state per the evidenceavailable to it that, the allegations sited in the supposed withdrawnpetitionwere unfounded, unsubstantiated and therefore without merit.

    Thecommittee however wishes to thank the five Hon. Members of the Assembly namelyHon.Fuseini Okasha, Member for Buglan-fong Electoral Area, Hon. Dawuda Abdul-Wahab,Member for Yong-Dakpemyili Electoral Area, Hon. Zakaria Mustapha, Member forKootingli Electoral Area, Hon. Haruna Mashud, Member for Gumbihini NorthElectoral Area  and last but not theleast, Hon. Salifu Mohammed Mutala, Member for Mohiyebihi Electoral Area forshowing respect and honor to the PRCC by honoring invitations of the committee.

    Thecommittee will also wish to thank the Hon. Metropolitan Chief Executive(Iddrisu Musah) for show of respect for the committee and taking time off hisbusy schedule to honor the committee’s invitation.

    Thankyou.

    REPORT PREPARED AND CERTIFIED THIS DAY……………………….. BYTHE UNDERLISTED MEMBERS OF THE PRCC:

    No.

    NAME

    DESIGNATION

     SIGNATURE

    1.

    Hon. Alhaji Abubakari Adam Takoro     (Chairman)

    Lamashegu South

     

    2.

    Hon. Alhaji Ahmed Hafiz Sualihu

    Government Appointee

     

    3.

    Hon. Abdul-Rashid Mohammed

    Gumbihini South

     

    4.

    Mr. Suuk .Y. Cletus

    NCCE

     

    5.

    Miss Kawusada Abubakari

    NORSAC (Civil society)

     

    6.

    Issah Salifu Musah

    Member Secretary

     

      Fill out your Comment