Author: Seth J. Bokpe

  • Huge swathe of Dodowa Forest cleared to relocate traders, raising alarm among environmentalists

    Huge swathe of Dodowa Forest cleared to relocate traders, raising alarm among environmentalists

    A section of the historic Dodowa Forest in the Greater Accra Region has been cleared to make way for the relocation of traders ahead of a planned reconstruction of the Dodowa Market into a 24-Hour Economy Market.

    The move has sparked concerns over environmental destruction, cultural heritage loss, and the risk that a supposedly temporary move could become permanent.

    Critics, including environmental experts and community leaders, say the decision sacrifices a vital green space with ecological and historical significance while raising questions about whether alternative sites could have spared the forest from degradation.

    A pile of sand at the site in the Dodowa Forest

    Critics say what makes the decision even more contentious is because part of the cleared forest had been the focus of reforestation efforts involving community volunteers and the Forestry Commission.

    When The Fourth Estate visited the site, what used to be home to trees, shrubs, and seedlings had been cleared, and the debris hauled away with some building materials on the sidelines of the newly cleared space.

    Dr Ebenezer Djaney Djagbletey, a former Director of Operations at the Forestry Commission who led some of those tree-planting campaigns, described the clearing as a setback to climate resilience efforts in the area.

    “This is improper,” Dr. Djegbletey told The Fourth Estate. “Globally, the discourse is to contain climate change and associated global warming issues. The solution on the table is that we must plant more trees, not to cut them down.”

    Dr Ebenezer Djaney Djagbletey, a former Director of Operations at the Forestry Commission

    He accused the Shai-Osudoku District Assembly of destroying hundreds of tree seedlings planted by him and other community members as part of past efforts to protect a forest that has faced years of encroachment.

    Some community leaders, however, are not against redevelopment of the market even though they question the cost of the clearance of parts of the forest to the community’s heritage. Renner Awatey Kwesi Noah, an opinion leader in Dodowa, rejects the choice of location for the temporary market site.

    He told The Fourth Estate that while the upgrade of the market is critical for the local economy, it should not be done at the expense of a forest that holds a special place as a cultural heritage for the people of Dodowa.

    He warned that the ongoing preparatory and anticipated concrete works in the forest, coupled with the likely difficulty the district assembly would face in controlling the activities of market women, would make it extremely hard for the forest to recover once the traders are eventually relocated from the forest.

    Significance of Dodowa Forest

    The Dodowa Forest is revered as the site of the Battle of Katamanso, which was fought nearly 200 years ago between the Ga-Adangbes and Asantes.

    Rich in biodiversity and a host to a waterfall, the forest serves as a buffer against the urban sprawl from Accra and plays a critical role in biodiversity, local climate regulation, and watershed protection. It also provides medicinal plants and acts as a carbon sink in the Greater Accra Region, which is increasingly under pressure from development.

    Over the years, the forest has faced steady encroachment, with the recent one being by a developer who, The Fourth Estate learned, claims he bought part of the forest lands from the chiefs of Obosomase, a town in the Akuapem South Municipality of the Eastern Region.

    Traders’ position

    Traders in the current Dodowa market told The Fourth Estate that plans to reconstruct the market have been shrouded in secrecy and that they only received scant information from the rumor mill rather than official channels.

    The current Dodowa Forest

    “We have not been officially informed, but we have heard the rumor. Now that they are moving us, they said we cannot take our containers along, so we don’t know how we are going to work there,” Hannah Titiati, a 70-year-old grocery shop owner, told The Fourth Estate.

    Grace Dartey, 22, a fried fish seller, told The Fourth Estate that she has been in the market for over a decade since she took over her mother’s business. She said her experience with a previous relocation attempt about six years ago makes her very skeptical.

    “They moved us to the Ghanata Park. They said they were coming to build a market for us. That’s where they built these two buildings,” she said, pointing to two uncompleted structures. “That is the only thing they did.”

    DCE speaks

    The District Chief Executive for Shai-Osudoku, Ignatius Godfred Dordoe, confirmed that the Assembly was indeed working to relocate the traders.

    He told The Fourth Estate that apart from using the period of the relocation of the traders to reconstruct the market, the Assembly was also strategically using the presence of the traders to prevent further encroachment of the forest, particularly by the developer who claims to have acquired parts of the forest from a chief several miles away in a different administrative region.

    “It is the reason we’ve walled a section of the forest,” he said

    Alternative locations

    Critics insist the Assembly had options.

    Mr Noah, the opinion leader, points to a parcel of land which had already been earmarked for craft vendors as a viable alternative for the temporary market.

    Dr Djagbletey, the former Forestry Commission official, proposes a return to Ghanata Park, which previously served as a relocation site during earlier market works.

    Both options, they argue, would spare the forest degradation from which it would take years to recover.

    Greater Accra Regional Minister reacts

    The Greater Accra Regional Minister, Linda Akweley Ocloo, who confirmed ordering the clearing of the section of the forest, said there were no alternative lands to relocate the traders.   

    Greater Accra Regional Minister, Linda Akweley Ocloo

    “Do you know the number of people at the market? That is where we have our astro turf; how can we send our market women there? I came to Dodowa when I was 10 years old. I don’t know where [sic] has been earmarked [for any market]. I know Dodowa very well,” she said. 

    She insisted that the relocation was a temporary one for the project.

    “We don’t compromise when it comes to government projects,” she said. When The Fourth Estate pointed out the potential destruction when the market is relocated, she dismissed it, saying, “How can we destroy the forest? There is a limit to where the market women will be sitting.”

    Forest Commission’s reaction

    The Chief Executive Officer of the Forestry Commission, Hugh Brown, told The Fourth Estate that even though the Dodowa Forest is not a gazetted forest but rather a community one, clearing parts of it should worry the entire nation.

    “We have to go to the landowners. If it is their wish that it remains a forest, and it is rather the [district] assembly that is doing this, then it is unfortunate,” he said. “Everybody knows about the history of the Dodowa forest. Some things go on in the forest that have become part of our culture and traditional conservation.”

    He said that once the landowners demonstrate a commitment to preserving the Dodowa Forest as a forest, the Forestry Commission would initiate the necessary processes to have it gazetted, thereby protecting it from encroachment and developments such as the one being pursued by the Assembly.

    The Registrar of the Dodowa Traditional Council told The Fourth Estate that the council is not aware of the development.

    However, the Regional Minister insists the local traditional council knew about it. 

    Critics of the Assembly’s decision fear that the relocation of the traders to the forest, touted to be temporary, could become permanent, transforming a protected green space into a permanent commercial zone.

  • Millions paid to ‘ghost hotels’ during African Games — Auditor-General

    Millions paid to ‘ghost hotels’ during African Games — Auditor-General

    Two hotels reportedly used to accommodate guests and athletes during the 2023 African Games, for which the state paid millions, cannot be traced, according to the Auditor-General’s report.

    The report stated that the hotels, Alphabet and Swiss Ghana, were booked through an intermediary company, JDK Travel and Tours, but could not be “independently identified or confirmed as registered hotel establishments.”

    Further checks, the Auditor-General said, revealed that SWISS Hotels is the previous name for Alisa Hotel (Swiss Spirit Hotel & Suites), which already had a contract with the Local Organising Committee (LOC) for the provision of hotel accommodation for guests and athletes for the 13th African Games.

    The two hotels were part of five others reportedly used to accommodate DR Congo, Senegal, and their officials at the 13th African Games for which the state spent GHS 18.9 million.

    The audit report, however, did not indicate the exact amount the two ‘ghost hotels’ were paid.

    President John Dramani Mahama in October 2025 directed the Audit Service to do a forensic audit of the continental sports event, which Ghana hosted in 2024 and was fraught with allegations of financial impropriety.

    The Fourth Estate in March 2025 raised questions about some of the expenditure incurred in the hosting of the games, which, according to the Auditor-General’s report, cost the public purse more than GHS 2.2 billion. 

    Unqualified company

    According to the report, the service provider, JDK Travel and Tours Limited, was registered on December 14, 2022 and had no license from the Ghana Tourism Authority to provide accommodation services. The company does not manage, operate, nor own any accommodation facility directly.  However, it was awarded $1.5 million contract (the equivalent of a little over GHS 18.9 million).

    Describing JDK Travel and Tours as an ‘unqualified contractor’, the report said the payment of GHS 18.5 million to “a non-specialized intermediary represents a lack of value for money and exorbitant ‘middleman’ markups.”

    The state auditors also took issue with the cost of rooms the company booked.

    “Our review, supported by market research, indicated that the room rates charged by the intermediary, JDK Travel and Tours, were excessively higher than the official room rates published and charged by the respective hotels.”

    The report noted that as a result of excessive overpricing, the Ministry of Youth and Sports (MoYS) and the Local Organizing Committee (LOC) lost a total amount of $840,000.00 (GHS 10,080,000), as 500 rooms (250 standard rooms and 250 executive rooms) were used for a total of 21 days.

    Company’s response

    The Fourth Estate reached out to JDK Travel and Tours several times between Monday and Wednesday seeking a response, including the locations of the Swiss and Alphabet hotels. However, although the company repeatedly promised to respond, no response was provided.

    Management response

    However, the management response accompanying the audit report noted that JDK was initially not part of the arrangement of the provision of hotel accommodation.

    “This arrangement was made as a stop-gap to address emergency accommodation shortage. Most of the hotels the LOC initially engaged declined to offer the services due to the ministry indebtedness during the previous games,” the report said.  “JDK was the only company capable and willing to provide pre-financing services to the LOC/Ministry.”

    The report said the International Technical Officers (ITOS) / National Technical Officers (NTOs) per the protocol agreement, were supposed to have been put in three or four- star hotels.

    “Therefore, the Local Organising Committee was compelled to immediately arrange to accommodate them and provide similar services which three- or four-star hotels would have provided them.”

    Further justifying the cost, the response said the arrangement reduced the cost of rooms per day as three and four-star hotels were charging between USD 250 and USD 350 per day.

    “The hotels provided only accommodation while JDK had to provide ancillary services such as laundry, lunch and dinner,” it said.

    These explanations notwithstanding, the Auditor-General has recommended that the former Minister of Youth and Sports, Minister Ussif; the former Chief Director of the Ministry, William Kartey and the Chairman of the Local Organising Committee of the tournament should be sanctioned under Section 92 of the Public Procurement Act.

    The law states: “any person who contravenes any provision of this Act commits an offence and where no penalty has been provided for the offence, the person is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding 1000 penalty units or a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years or to both.”

    YOU MAY ALSO WANT TO READ

  • Supreme Court dismisses Gifty Oware-Mensah’s pleading to halt her trial at the High Court

    Supreme Court dismisses Gifty Oware-Mensah’s pleading to halt her trial at the High Court

    The Supreme Court has dismissed an application by former Deputy Executive Director of the National Service Authority (NSA), Gifty Oware-Mensah, seeking to halt her trial at the High Court pending a constitutional challenge over the disclosure of defence witnesses.

    The former NSA Deputy Executive Director is on trial for her alleged role in the ghost names on payroll scandal. She has been charged with offences including stealing, willfully causing financial loss to the state, using public office for profit, and money laundering. She has pleaded not guilty.

    Mrs Oware-Mensah had asked the apex court to stay proceedings at the High Court until it determines whether it is constitutional for an accused person to be compelled to file a list of witnesses before the commencement of trial.

    However, the five-member panel of the Supreme Court, presided over by Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, unanimously held that the High Court proceedings could continue regardless of the constitutional challenge.

    “We are of the view that, having reviewed the processes so far, the application for stay does not meet the threshold for stay of proceedings. 

    “The applicant may choose to pursue the interpretation of the practice direction but the trial at the High court may still go on,” Chief Justice Baffoe-Bonnie said of Mrs Oware-Mensah’s legal challenge against her trial at the High Court.  

    Lawyers for Mrs Oware-Mensah are challenging the constitutionality of Part 2(3a) of the Practice Direction governing criminal trials in Ghana which requires accused persons to file their witness statement during case management. 

    The Practice Direction, issued in 2018 and signed by former Chief Justice Sophia Akuffo, governs criminal proceedings in courts with criminal jurisdiction across Ghana.

    However Mrs Oware-Mensah’s lawyer’s argued that the High Court’s reliance on the Practice Direction violates Articles 19(2)(c) and 19(10) of the 1992 Constitution, which guarantee fair trial rights and protections for accused persons.

    Making a case for his client earlier, Gary Nimako Marfo, lawyer for Mrs Oware-Mensah, contended that the High Court’s indication that it would “advise itself” should the accused fail to file her witness list implied adverse consequences should her client fail to comply with the order.

    But Justice Senyo Dzamefe, however, cut in at this point and questioned that argument, pointing out that an accused person retains the right to decide whether or not to testify or call witnesses in their defence.

    Justice Gabriel Scott Pwamang also joined the argument and pointed out the accused could elect not to call witnesses initially and later choose to do so as the trial progresses.

    “If you decide not to call any witnesses at this point, it is allowed and if you decide to call witnesses later as the trial proceeds, you can do that. If you don’t have witnesses, you just have to tell the court,” Justice Pwamang stated.

    The Court therefore ruled that the High Court’s directive requiring Ms Oware-Mensah to file her witness list does not compel her to do so immediately and does not prevent her from choosing to file the list at any stage of the trial if she deems it necessary.

    “We do not think this application is enough to stop the case from moving to trial,” the Chief Justice stated.

    Background

    Mr Marfo has consistently argued that requiring his client to disclose the names and addresses of defence witnesses before the prosecution opens its case violates her constitutional rights.

    He therefore prayed the Supreme Court to stay proceedings at the High Court until the constitutional question is determined.

    Since the commencement of the trial, Ms Oware-Mensah’s legal team has opposed the High Court’s directive requiring the accused to file the names and addresses of her witnesses in line with Part 2(3a) of the Practice Direction.

    The Practice Direction, issued in 2018 and signed by former Chief Justice Sophia Akuffo, governs criminal proceedings in courts with criminal jurisdiction across Ghana.

    On May 11, 2026, Mr Marfo told the High Court that he intended to challenge the directive before the Supreme Court, arguing that the apex court’s eventual ruling would have material implications for his client’s trial.

    He subsequently prayed the High Court to adjourn proceedings until the Supreme Court delivered its decision.

    Since January 20, 2026, the disagreement over the filing of defence witnesses has dominated proceedings and delayed the substantive hearing of the criminal case.

    The High Court had earlier dismissed a similar application on March 24, 2026, in which the defence sought to suspend proceedings pending an appeal on the same issue.

    The criminal case against the former NSA executive follows a series of investigations published by The Fourth Estate in 2025.

    The investigations uncovered how thousands of ghost names, including fictitious or ineligible individuals such as toddlers, elderly persons, and persons with no verifiable links to tertiary institutions, were allegedly inserted into the NSA payroll system.

    According to the investigations, the ghost names were created through manipulated posting schemes that enabled the payment of millions of cedis in allowances to non-existent national service personnel.

    The investigations also exposed serious failures in data integrity controls, value-for-money safeguards, and the credibility of the Centralised Service Management Platform (CSMP). Rather than preventing fraud, the digital platform was allegedly manipulated to bypass validation checks, generate fake student index numbers, and facilitate payments to fictitious beneficiaries.

    The Office of the Attorney-General and Ministry of Justice subsequently launched an independent investigation, relying heavily on evidence and leads from The Fourth Estate’s reporting.

    The Attorney-General’s probe reportedly confirmed widespread financial irregularities involving senior NSA officials and private-sector collaborators.

    In October 2025, Attorney-General Dominic Ayine announced that the fraudulent schemes had resulted in the mismanagement and loss of more than GHS2.2 billion.

    Criminal proceedings have since been initiated against key figures, including former NSA Executive Director Osei Assibey Antwi and Ms Oware-Mensah, who face multiple charges, including stealing, causing financial loss to the state, and money laundering.

  • President Mahama directs renegotiation of the terrible NLA-KGL deal

    President Mahama directs renegotiation of the terrible NLA-KGL deal

    President John Dramani Mahama has directed an immediate renegotiation of the contractual relationship between the National Lottery Authority (NLA) and KGL Technology Limited.

    The President’s directive follows the conclusion of the work of a committee he set up in December last year to conduct a comprehensive review of the controversial contracts between the NLA and KGL Technology Limited. 

    A letter The Fourth Estate has sighted indicates the committee concluded that while the terms of the current agreement with KGL are not illegal, “the revenue-sharing structure is not financially advantageous to the Republic.”

    The President’s decision comes on the back of The Fourth Estate’s investigations, which uncovered questionable arrangements that allowed the NLA to receive only GHS 157.6 million out of the GHS 3 billion revenue KGL earned in 2024.

    In line with the committee’s recommendations, the President has also ordered a comprehensive review of the country’s lottery and gaming laws to align them with global technological trends and industry best practices.

     Additionally, he wants measures to be introduced to protect the livelihoods of NLA coupon-based vendors, many of whom operate from kiosks across the country.

    Background

    In 2019, the then Director-General of the NLA, Kofi Osei Ameyaw, signed a controversial three-year contract with KGL Technology Limited to operate the NLA’s 5/90 lottery online via a USSD code. Based on the terms of the 2019 contract, KGL would have paid the NLA a total of GHS 600 million, being 20% of the GHS 3 billion the company earned as gross revenue in 2024—a figure the Group Chairman of KGL, Alex Dadey Apau confirmed to The Fourth Estate.

    Upon expiration of the contract in 2022, Samuel Awuku (who succeeded Osei Ameyaw as director general) and his board renewed the contract with KGL for a 10-year period.

    But before the expiration of the 10-year period, Mr.  Awuku and his Board, chaired by Gary Nimako Marfo, in 2024, signed a new contract with KGL, granting the company exclusive rights to operate the 5/90 lottery online via USSD. This new contract is for 15 years (from 2024 to 2039) with an automatic renewal for another five years.

    Mr. Awuku and his board also signed two other contracts for KGL to operate the 5/90 online lottery in Nigeria and Cote d’Ivoire. These two contracts were for 10 years each.

    The Fourth Estate’s investigations revealed that annual revenue to KGL from the NLA’s 5/90 online lottery in 2024 alone was over GHS 3 billion or over GHS 250 million each month.

    Under the terms of the deal, however, KGL was supposed to pay a total of just GHC157.6 million to NLA in 2024, for all three contracts in Ghana, Nigeria, and Côte d’Ivoire. This amount was to be increased annually by just 10% each year. The amount that was to be paid in 2024 represented a paltry 5.2% of the revenue KGL generated from the NLA’s prime business.

    The National Lotto Act, 2006 (Act 722) does not allow any private company to operate any form of lottery in Ghana. It makes the operations of the lottery in Ghana the sole preserve of the NLA. Section 4(1)-(2) of the law states: “A person other than the Authority shall not operate any form of lottery.”

    “A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine of not more than two thousand five hundred penalty units or imprisonment for a term of not more than three years or both.”

    The law, however, requires the NLA to contract private companies to sell lottery as Lotto Marketing Companies (LMCs).

    The NLA Act also requires that all proceeds from the sales of lottery by LMCs should be paid into what is called the Lotto Account of the NLA. From this account, the NLA is then supposed to pay stipulated commissions to the LMCs.

    The Fourth Estate’s investigations, however, revealed that NLA’s deals with KGL are unusual at best, and illegitimate at worst. First of all, KGL’s revenues do not go into the Lotto Account. In fact, the NLA does not even know how much KGL makes in sales. Secondly, while the law requires all LMCs to be paid a commission by the NLA, under the current deal, KGL is paying the NLA what the licence agreement describes as “revenue share.”   

    In 2024, the NLA was paying LMCs a commission of 25% on their sales. In these exclusive and monopolistic contracts, what KGL paid the NLA in 2024 amounted to just 5.2% of the company’s 2024 revenue.    

    Meanwhile, official documents from the State Interests and Governance Authority (SIGA) have revealed that NLA’s revenues have been on a steep decline from GHS 366 million in 2015 to GHS 296.58 million in 2023.

  • Mahama demands answers from Roads Minister over sole-sourced contracts

    Mahama demands answers from Roads Minister over sole-sourced contracts

    President John Dramani Mahama has directed the Minister of Roads and Highways, Kwame Governs Agbodza, to respond to concerns over sole-sourced contracts under the Big Push programme. The directive follows The Fourth Estate’s latest investigative report and requires a detailed response including a breakdown of contracts for the Presidency.

    “Although we have seen snippets of the investigation from the media, I have instructed my office to obtain the full detailed report from the Fourth Estate and to conduct a study of the various allegations presented in the report,” the President said during a dialogue with civil society organisations at the Jubilee House in Accra, on Monday.

    According to the President, while sole-sourcing is allowed under certain circumstances by the country’s procurement laws, “we would all agree that open, transparent tenders are always preferable for achieving competitive pricing and value for money.”

    The President also said the procurement law would be reviewed to limit the use of sole-sourcing.

    The President’s directive follows The Fourth Estate’s latest publication, which showed how the Ministry of Roads and Highways under Kwame Governs Agbodza had resorted mainly to the award of contracts under the Big Push programme through sole-sourcing.

    The Fourth Estate revealed that out of 107 road contracts awarded under the Big Push programme, 81 were on a sole-sourcing basis and 26 on restricted tendering, with none awarded under competitive tendering.

    The story also questioned past rhetoric of some members of the current administration, including Mr Agbodza, who criticised the Akufo-Addo administration for using sole-sourcing to fleece the state. In contrast, the current road minister supervised the award of 76% of contracts under sole-sourcing. 

    Subsequent reports also questioned the cost per kilometre of road contracts awarded under the Big Push Programme, particularly the 46-kilometre Dodo Pepesu-Nkwanta Road, which was initially constructed at the cost of €25.9 million but has now shot up to more than €63 million for rehabilitation.

    The Fourth Estate also raised issues about how Growth 82 Global Ltd, a company registered in January 2025, and was awarded a multi-million-euro Dodo Pepesu-Nkwanta road for rehabilitation in December 2025.

    That is not all. Build Managers, the company awarded the contract to upgrade the nine-kilometre Apegusu–Mpakadan feeder road at a cost of more than GHS146 million, indicated on its Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT) clearance certificate that it had only one employee.

    Similarly, Sanam Ghana Limited, which is undertaking the upgrade of the Todome–Toh Kpalime–Dzemeni feeder road and the Dzemeni town roads, listed just four employees on its SSNIT clearance certificate—raising questions about the pre-contract qualifications of some of these companies.

    Ministry’s response to the story

    In response to The Fourth Estate’s findings, the Minister of Roads and Highways, Kwame Governs Agbodza, told Parliament that the ministry had awarded more than 400 road contracts, including those under the Big Push programme, through competitive bidding—without providing evidence to support the claim.

    In an apparent attempt to discredit the story, the ministry published a list of 54 road contracts it had awarded, but notably omitted the procurement methods used.

    An analysis of the published contracts shows that seven were awarded through selective tendering, while a staggering 47—representing 87%—were sole-sourced.

    The report has triggered demand for accountability among a section of the public and civil society organisations, who are questioning the government’s commitment to limiting the use of sole-sourcing for government procurement.

    While key figures in the current administration, including Sammy Gyamfi, then National Communications Officer of the National Democratic Congress (NDC); North Tongu MP Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, and the Minister of Roads and Highways, Kwame Governs Agbodza, previously condemned sole-sourcing as a breeding ground for corruption, the President, in two State of the Nation Addresses, committed his government to using the method only in rare instances.

    YOU MAY ALSO WANT TO READ

    Disregard for President’s vow for prudence: Ministry awards 81 sole-sourced contracts worth over GHS73 billion in 7 months

    Big Push: Here’s how much we’re paying for every kilometre of road

    Full disclosure: List of Big Push sole-sourced contracts

  • Big Push: Here’s how much we’re paying for every kilometre of road

    Big Push: Here’s how much we’re paying for every kilometre of road

    The Fourth Estate on Wednesday published a full list of road contracts published under the government’s Big Push Programme – an initiative aimed at transforming Ghana’s road sector.

    The publication scrutinised the procurement methods used by the Ministry of Roads and Highways in awarding 81 contracts through sole-sourcing, a method the National Democratic Congress heavily criticised in the past, but has now indulged in.

    The Fourth Estate provides an analysis of cost per kilometre for these contracts worth over GHS 80 billion, according to data from the Ministry of Roads and Highways. More than 73 billion of this went to contracts from sole-sourcing.

    Some of these roads have been divided into multiple lots and given to either one contractor or multiple contractors, which the Minister of Roads and Highways, Kwame Governs Agbodza, has said was meant to ensure early completion of the projects.

    What goes into cost per kilometre?

    According to experts in the road construction industry, who asked for anonymity, the cost per kilometre for roads is affected by multiple factors, including topography, road classification and width, drainage and bridge requirements, land acquisition, compensation for landowners, and the distance materials must be hauled to the site. Additionally, the cost of labour and equipment costs, regulatory compliance, and project management costs.

    To determine the cost of each road project, the contract sum of each project has been divided by the number of kilometres of the road.

    Using this calculation, the dualisation of a 25-kilometre road, awarded to M.A & Constant Company Ltd on September 29, 2025, at a cost of GHS 3.86 billion, translates into approximately GHS 154.4 million per kilometre (about $14.2 million).

    The same company is handling another 24-kilometre stretch of the same road, also awarded in September 2025, for GHS 1.87 billion—bringing the cost per kilometre down to about GHS 78.2 million (approximately $7.2 million).

    Similarly, the rehabilitation of the 18.3-kilometre Tema–Aflao road, awarded in September 2025 to First Sky Limited for GHS 1.47 billion, works out to about GHS 80.7 million per kilometre (around $7.4 million).

    The reconstruction of the 24.8-kilometre Dodowa–Afienya–Dawhenya road in the Greater Accra Region, along with selected town roads, was awarded in September 2025 to Oswal Investment Ltd for GHS 1.1 billion—equivalent to about GHS 45 million per kilometre (approximately $4.1 million).

    In the case of the 32.6-kilometre Techiman–Nkonsia–Wenchi road, awarded to Volta Impex in November 2025 for nearly GHS 1.2 billion, the cost per kilometre is estimated at GHS 36.4 million (about $3.3 million).

    The upgrading of the 8.6-kilometre Kabonwule–Blajai road in the Northern Region, awarded in August 2025 to Aawerco Construction Limited, has a total contract sum of GHS 270.3 million, translating into approximately GHS 31.4 million per kilometre (around $2.9 million).

    Meanwhile, the rehabilitation of the 17.5-kilometre Atimpoku–Asikuma Junction Road, awarded in September 2025 to Ussuya (GH) Limited, costs nearly GHS 25 million per kilometre, with a total contract value of GHS 433.7 million.

    Cost of roads per kilometre in the past

    In June 2021, the Ministry of Roads and Highways released a statement clarifying the cost of roads per kilometre. The figures were pegged as follows:

    • Surface dressed costs $300,000- $9000,000 per km (depending on the number of seals and base material).
    • Asphalt overlay costs $200,000 -$250,000

    Below is a full list of the cost per kilometer for other roads under the Big Push

  • Disregard for President’s vow for prudence: Ministry awards 81 sole-sourced contracts worth over GHS73 billion in 7 months

    Disregard for President’s vow for prudence: Ministry awards 81 sole-sourced contracts worth over GHS73 billion in 7 months

    During his first State of the Nation Address (SONA) on February 27, 2025, President John Mahama pledged to prioritise Ghana’s infrastructure to address the “pressing backlog of poor roads.” He announced the “Big Push” programme as the flagship initiative to deliver the promise.

    He vowed his government, unlike previous ones, would do things differently in the award of contracts under the Big Push programme. The President promised that his government will “Minimise sole-source procurement to encourage competitive bidding and enhance public transparency in procurement processes.”

    Four days later, the President made this vow again while addressing the National Economic Dialogue (NED) in Accra. He described the excessive abuse of sole-sourcing of public sector contracts as an act that leads to inflated contracts and causes a major drain on the country’s finances. 

    “Single-source procurement must be the rare exception rather than the norm,” President Mahama said. 

    One year into his administration, he remained committed to his vow, at least in words. At the 2026 SONA, he repeated his vow and commitment to ending the practice of excessive and unjustified awards of government contracts through sole-sourcing.

    “Mr Speaker, we are bringing legislation to this House to tighten our procurement processes by banning sole-sourced contracts, except in exceptional circumstances,” the President told Parliament.

    The promise to stop the abuse of sole-source procurement is one that President Mahama and his governing NDC party have been making since they were in opposition.

    In the 2020 People’s Manifesto, the NDC pledged to “make single-sourced procurement (sole-sourcing) an exception and not the rule.” The pledge was repeated in the 2024 Reset Agenda Manifesto.

    But in what appears to be a bold and complete disregard and defiance of the President’s vow and promises to the nation, the Ministry of Roads and Highways has literally become a factory for sole-sourced road contracts. The Ministry has been churning out what translates into almost 12 sole-sourced contracts per month.

    Not a single one of the 107 contracts was awarded based on competitive tendering

    Data available to The Fourth Estate indicates that in the last seven months, the ministry has awarded 107 road contracts. Contrary to the President’s promise to ensure competitiveness and transparency in the awarding of public contracts, not a single one of 107 contracts was awarded based on competitive tendering.

    A whopping 81 out of the 107 road contracts worth over GHS73 billion were awarded through sole-sourcing. The remaining 26 contracts worth about GHS8 billion were awarded through selective tendering. This means over 90% of the amount of money expected to be spent on roads under the Big Push programme so far was given out through sole-sourcing.

    Despite this glaring contrast, the majority leader and leader of government business in Parliament, Mahama Ayariga, audaciously proclaimed to Parliament on March 11, 2026, that “let it be known, the era of the sole-sourced contract is dead.”

    Minister’s response

    When asked how contracts under the Big Push programme were awarded, the Minister of Roads and Highways, Kwame Governs Agbodza, said they resorted largely to selective tendering.

    “Contracts were procured predominantly through restrictive tendering to ensure rapid project commencement,” he said. “Before procurement, the Ministry and agencies conducted extensive engineering studies, including feasibility studies and seal of quality and commitment authorisation for each project.”

    Mr Agbodza’s claim that the contracts were mainly awarded through restrictive tendering, however, is counter to data obtained from his Ministry and the Ghana Highway Authority. The data available to The Fourth Estate, obtained through Right to Information (RTI) requests, reveals that about 76% of the contracts awarded from September 2025 to January 2026 were through sole-sourcing. 

    The Minister does not believe that the manner in which the contracts have been awarded contradicts his party’s avowed position of avoiding the abuse of sole-sourcing.

    “Contracting under the Big Push fully aligns with the National Democratic Congress (NDC) manifesto and government policy. Public contracts are awarded to competent, experienced, and well-resourced contractors, prioritising Ghanaian firms to build local capacity,” he said.

    It is instructive to note that, while in opposition and serving as the Ranking Member of Parliament’s Roads and Transport Committee, Mr Agbodza was an ardent critic of sole-sourcing of road contracts.

    In 2021, he addressed a major press conference on the issue of sole-sourcing and proclaimed: “Part of the reason why the government is unable to build more roads is because of the use of sole-sourcing in the award of road projects, [which] inflates the cost of such contracts.”

    What the Public Procurement Law says

    Ghana’s public procurement law (Act 663) frowns on the regular and unjustified use of sole-sourcing or single-source procurement. It only permits it under exceptional circumstances.

    Section 40 (1) of the law prescribes exceptional cases to include circumstances where goods, works, or services are only available from a particular supplier or contractor who has exclusive rights to them.

    The law also makes room for sole-sourcing only when there is an urgent need for the goods, works, or services during catastrophic moments or emergencies during which using other procurement methods would be impractical.

    Many, therefore, wonder the circumstances that justify the overwhelming resort to sole-sourcing in the award of road projects under the Big Push initiative.

    Civil society leaders react

    Multiple civil society leaders who spoke to The Fourth Estate condemned the ministry’s over-reliance on the sole-sourcing as it undermines transparency and value for money, and betrays the President’s promises.

    Mary Addah, Executive Director of Transparency International Ghana

    Mary Addah, Executive Director of Transparency International Ghana, bemoaned that despite the existence of a law and a procurement authority, public officers continue to flout procurement rules.

    “It’s sad, and the double standards are just too many. And it’s becoming worrisome for those of us who do this on a daily basis.  It’s sad that people who stand on the pulpit to say one thing carry on and do other things.”

    She added that these breaches continue to happen because public officers believe they will not be penalised when they do it.

    Ben Boakye, Executive Director of the Africa Centre for Energy Policy

    The Executive Director of the Africa Centre for Energy Policy, Ben Boakye, shared similar views, noting that the findings were not what Ghanaians were promised.

    He said it has become obvious that those in charge now did not condemn sole-sourcing in the past out of concern for the public interest, but because they were not the decision-makers and beneficiaries at the time; now, they are benefiting from it.

    franklin cudjoe, president of imani africa

    Imani Africa’s president, Franklin Cudjoe, decried that it had become increasingly clear that the current public procurement system is a major revenue leakage point for the government.

    “We know the integrity of the procurement process has been compromised by weak institutional and regulatory frameworks, inefficient quality assurance measures, and a cultural tolerance for abuse and unethical behaviour of public officials,” he said.

     “We were hoping that these abuses were going to be curtailed in this new reset agenda. With these dizzying numbers, we are lost.”

    vitus azeem, anti-corruption crusader

    Anti-corruption crusader Vitus Azeem told The Fourth Estate that it was disappointing to see that the findings contradict President Mahama’s pledge in the State of the Nation Address to introduce legislation that reduces sole-sourcing.

    Mr Azeem noted that “it’s surprising that just one year into power, such situations exist. Because, you see, the procurement law talks of competitive bidding. And sole-sourcing or restricted bidding is not a norm.”

    NDC’s past rhetoric on sole-sourcing

    Samuel okudzeto (l) ablakwa and sammy gyamfi criticised the previous administration for abusing sole-sourcing

    While in opposition, some leading members of the NDC deplored the Akufo-Addo administration’s abuse of sole-sourcing.

    In May 2024, MP for North Tongu, Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, now Foreign Affairs Minister, said Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia had engaged in “deplorable conduct” on the allegation that a contract had been awarded to a company said to belong to the former Vice President’s siblings on a sole-source basis.

    Sammy Gyamfi, CEO of GoldBod, who was then the National Communications Officer of the NDC, reiterated Agboza’s concern that inflated sole-sourcing contracts were causing Ghana to lose billions of cedis. He made this claim in one of his moments of truth series on TV in August 2024.

    A year into the Mahama administration, the government’s sole-sourcing record in the road sector alone shows the government may be copying from the very script NDC officials criticised and condemned.

  • 151 MPs violate assets declaration law

    151 MPs violate assets declaration law

    More than half of the lawmakers in Ghana’s current Parliament have failed to declare their assets and liabilities in breach of major anti-corruption legislation.

    151 out of the 276 Members of Parliament, including some leaders of the House, have failed to fulfil the key constitutional requirement meant to ensure that public officeholders do not use their offices to enrich themselves.

    An analysis of data The Fourth Estate obtained from the Audit Service, and verified twice, through a Right to Information request, shows that approximately 55 % of MPs have not complied with the mandatory asset declaration requirement as of December 2025.

    Of these defaulters, 81 (54%) are from the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC), 68 (45%) are from the opposition NPP. Two independent MPs have also defaulted.

    The data also highlight a higher rate of noncompliance among newer lawmakers, as 87 defaulters (58%) are first-term MPs. Among continuing MPs, 38 are serving their second term; 13 are in their third term; 11 are in their fourth term, and one each in their fifth, sixth, and eighth terms.

    Notable names among the defaulters include the immediate past Defence Minister and MP for Bimbilla, Dominic Nitiwul, who is serving his sixth term, and veteran MP for Asutifi South, Collins Dauda, who is in his eighth term.

    The non-compliance extends to parliamentary leadership. Five House leaders have failed to declare: on the NDC side, Deputy Majority Leader Kweku Ricketts-Hagan and Majority Chief Whip Rockson-Nelson Etse Kwami Dafeamekpor; on the NPP side, Deputy Minority Leader Patricia Appiagyei, First Deputy Minority Chief Whip, Habib Iddrisu, and Second Deputy Minority Chief Whip, Jerry Ahmed Shaib.

    In 2022, The Fourth Estate revealed that 180 MPs had failed to declare their assets.

    Following that exposé, some leaders, including then-Deputy Majority Leader, Alexandar Afenyo-Markin and former Deputy Minority Leader, Dr. James Klutse Avedzi, immediately complied.

    Compliance in the Seventh and Eighth Parliaments (2017–2021) was dismal with only 20 MPs fully declared (a 7.2% compliance rate), with 129 making no declaration and 126 making only partial declarations.

    Some of the countrY’s long-serving MPS, Collins Dauda(top LEFT), Dominic Nitiwul (top middle), Kwabena Okyere DARKO (top right), Helen Ntoso (Down left), John Oti Bless (down middle), and Kennedy Osei Nyarko, who are serving terms ranging from 4th to 8th, have not declared their assets and liabilities

    Civil society worries

    Executive Director of the Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition, Beauty Emefa Nartey, told The Fourth Estate that the persistent non-compliance is the result of weak enforcement.

    “The reality is that when eligible declarants perceive little to no consequences for failing to comply with the asset declaration regime, they naturally do not take the process seriously,” she said.

    The anti-graft campaigner called for the urgent passage of the Conduct of Public Officers Bill, which would introduce robust verification, clear enforcement mechanisms, and consistent sanctions.

    “Ultimately, we should build a culture where asset declaration is embraced as a civic duty, and not as a burden. This is essential for strengthening integrity and public trust in governance,” Ms Nartey added.

    What the law says

    According to the Public Office Holders (Declaration of Assets and Disqualification) Act, public officers (including MPs) are required to declare their assets within six months of assuming office and within six months after Parliament is dissolved.

    “The declaration shall be made by the public officer – (a) before taking office; (b) at the end of every four years; and (c) at the end of the term of his office and shall, in any event, be submitted not later than 6 months of the occurrence of any of the events specified in this subsection,” the law says.

    Legislators, like other public office holders covered by the law, are required to declare their assets, including land, houses, vehicles, securities, bank balances, and jewellery.

    The full list of defaulting MPs is below

    YOU MAY ALSO WANT TO READ:

    ASSET DECLARATION: 55 Appointees & Staffers Defy Mahama’s Order.… Will the President go by his words, or it was just empty threat?

    Asset Declarations: Full list of Mahama appointees who have complied — and those who haven’t — as of April 17

    Asset declaration Mahama appointees lose three-months’ salary for failing to declare assets and liabilities after The Fourth Estate’s exposé

    Asset declaration: The Supreme Court lords who disregarded the law

    Asset Declaration: 18 High Court, Court of Appeal judges Flout Law

  • Five leaders of Parliament snub asset declaration law

    Five leaders of Parliament snub asset declaration law

    Almost half of Parliament’s leadership has failed to declare their assets and liabilities more than a year after assuming office as lawmakers. This raises concerns about transparency and accountability at the very top of the legislative arm of government.

    Five out of 13 leaders from both the Majority and Minority sides in the legislature failed to comply with one of the anti-corruption laws meant to ensure that public officeholders do not use their office to enrich themselves illegally.

    Out of the five, three are from the New Patriotic Party (NPP) and two from the National Democratic Congress (NDC), data The Fourth Estate obtained from the Audit Service through a right to information request shows.

    The defaulters are Deputy Majority leader, Kweku Ricketts Hagan; Majority Chief Whip, Rockson-Nelson Etse Kwami Dafeamekpor, on the NDC side, and Deputy Minority leader, Patricia Appiagyei; First Deputy Minority Chief Whip, Habib Iddrisu and Second Deputy Minority Chief Whip, Jerry Ahmed Shaib on the NPP side.

    The Fourth Estate’s analysis of the data shows that the five leaders have been inconsistent with their declarations.

    The Deputy Minority Leader, Kweku Ricketts Hagan, and MP for Cape Coast South, who has been an MP since 2013 has declared his assets and liabilities only once in October 2016. Mr Defeamekpor on the other hand, entered Parliament in 2017 and has done two declarations in December 2017 and February 2023. 

    The Deputy Minority Leader, Patricia Appiagyei, who is also the MP for Asokwa, has also been in Parliament since 2013 but has also failed to fully comply with the law. She did the declarations in September 2016, April 2021 and September 2024, which shows she only fully complied when she became a deputy minister in the Akufo-Addo government.

    The last time Jerry Ahmed Shaib declared his assets and liabilities was in December 2020 when he was the CEO of the Coastal Development Authority. When he left office, he did not, neither did he comply with the law when he became an MP.

    Similarly, Habib Iddrissu, the First Minority Chief Whip and MP for Tolon, became an MP in 2020 but has declared his assets and liabilities only once in May 2023.

    GACC reacts

    Executive Director of the Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition, Beauty Emefa Nartey, told The Fourth Estate compliance rates are so low because there are no consequences for defaulters.

    “The reality is that when eligible declarants perceive little to no consequences for failing to comply with the asset declaration regime, they naturally do not take the process seriously,” she said

    She made a strong case for the long-awaited Conduct of Public Officers Bill, describing it as a game-changer for the country’s anti-corruption architecture.

    “It offers a real opportunity to address the persistent weaknesses in our current asset declaration framework,” she said.

    “We need the president to champion the enactment of a law that includes robust verification mechanisms, clear enforcement procedures, and the consistent application of sanctions. Ultimately, we should build a culture where asset declaration is embraced as a civic duty, and not as a burden. This is essential for strengthening integrity and public trust in governance.”

    What does the law say?

    Article 286 (1) of the 1992 Constitution states that “a person who holds a public office mentioned in clause (5) of this Article shall submit to the Auditor-General a written declaration of all property or assets owned by, or liabilities owed by, him whether directly or indirectly (a) within three months after the coming into force of this Constitution or before taking office, as the case may be, (b) at the end of every four years; and (b) at the end of his term of office.”

    The Constitution requires the declaration to be made before the public officer takes office. However, Section 1(4)(c) of the Public Office Holders (Declaration of Assets and Disqualification) Act directs the public office holder to meet this requirement “not later than six months after taking office, at the end of every four years, and not later than six months at the end of his or her term.”

    Currently, Liberia, South Africa, Tanzania, Cape Verde, and São Tomé and Príncipe are the only African countries that allow the publication of assets declared.

    Who must do the declaration?

    The asset declaration laws require that the President, Vice-President, the Speaker of Parliament, Deputy Speakers of Parliament, Members of Parliament, ministers and deputy ministers of State, ambassadors, the Chief Justice and Judges of the superior courts submit to the Auditor-General, written declarations of all property or assets owned or liabilities owed by them, whether directly or indirectly. Others required to make similar declarations are managers of public institutions in which the state has shares.

    However, The Fourth Estate’s investigations last year showed ministers, judges and other public officeholders disregarded the law.

  • Former government appointees under investigation, prosecution did not comply with asset declaration law

    Former government appointees under investigation, prosecution did not comply with asset declaration law

    When Osei Assibey Antwi was appointed Executive Director of the National Service Scheme in 2021, he was required by law to declare his assets and liabilities before he assumed office or within six months after taking the job.

    However, The Fourth Estate has found that five years on, Mr Assibey, who is facing 14 counts of financial crimes for his role in the NSS ghost names scandal, never declared his assets and liabilities.

    Through a right to information request, we also found that as of January 19, 2026, Mr Assibey’s two deputies, Gifty Oware-Aboagye and Kwaku Ohene Djan, also had not complied with the anti-graft law, which is meant to ensure that public officeholders do not use their office to enrich themselves.

    Osei  Assibey Antwi (middle), Gifty Oware-Aboagye (Left), and Kwaku Ohene Djan, all failed to declare their assets

    The trio are among 13 former appointees of former President Akufo-Addo who are currently either standing trial or are under investigation for various acts of financial improprieties. 

    Three others who have never fulfilled the constitutional obligation, according to the Audit Service data, include Col Kwadwo Damoah (retired), a former Commissioner of Customs, who has been charged alongside the former Finance Minister, Ken Ofori-Attah, for allegedly causing financial loss of more than GHC1.4 billion in the Strategic Mobilisation Limited (SML) contract saga, and Paul Adom-Otchere, former Board Chairman of the Ghana Airports Company Limited.

    Before he was elected to Parliament in 2024, Col Damoah served as Commissioner of Customs from May 2019 until his removal in August 2022 but did not comply with the asset declaration law. He also did not declare his assets upon assuming office as a Member of Parliament, data from the Audit Service shows.

    Similarly, The Fourth Estate found that Solomon Asamoah, a former CEO of the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund who is being prosecuted for his role in the $2 million “Sky Train” scandal, has not complied with the law.

    And then, there is Paul Adom-Otchere, who was appointed as Board Chairman of the Ghana Airport Company in 2021 and is being investigated for his role in the award of a revenue assurance contract between the Ghana Airports Company Limited (GACL) and a private company owned by EvaTex Logistics Limited, a company owned by the proprietor of Strategic Mobilisation Ghana Ltd (SML). SML was awarded a similar contract in the petroleum downstream, which has since been terminated.

    Paul Adom-Otchere was the Board chairman of GACL for four years, but failed to declare his assets and liabilities

    Partial declarations

    Beyond the six who made no declarations, six others made partial declarations either at the start or end of their tenures, making it difficult to possibly track their properties and liabilities before and after assuming office.

    Among those in this category is Kwabena Adu-Boahene, the immediate past Director-General of the Signals Bureau, who was appointed in 2017.  It took him more than eight years to declare his assets and liabilities, a flagrant violation of the law, which requires asset declaration within six months of assuming office and within six months after leaving office. Adu-Boahene, who is facing 11 charges, including using public office for profit and stealing, only declared his assets and liabilities for the first time on August 22, 2025, according to the Audit Service data. 

    The former Finance Minister only did his declaration once in eight years

    Fugitive former Minister of Finance, Ken Ofori-Attah, only once declared his assets and liabilities – two months after he was sworn into office on January 27, 2017. For the almost eight years he served in office as Finance Minister, Mr. Ofori-Atta should have declared his assets and liabilities four times. He faces criminal charges, including causing financial loss to the state, using public office for personal profit, and directly influencing the procurement process to obtain an unfair advantage in the award of contracts.

    The CEO of the National Food Buffer Stock Company, Abdul Hanan Wahab, who was appointed in 2017, also did not make his declaration until September 5, 2024, nearly eight years after his appointment.

    Abdul Hanan Wahab only declared his assets and liabilities months before the end of his tenure

    There is also the former Managing Director of the Bulk Oil Storage and Transportation Company (BOST), Edwin Alfred Provencal, who was appointed in August 2019 but did not do his declaration until April 27, 2022.

    Mr Provencal’s asset declaration history is not different from that of Professor Christopher Ameyaw-Akumfi, who chaired the board of the Ghana Infrastructure Investment Fund for eight years but declared on a date mistakenly captured as June 9, 1930, which the Audit Service admits is an error. Professor Ameyaw-Akumfi has been charged with conspiracy to commit a crime – specifically, willfully causing financial loss to the state.

    Dr. Ammishaddai Owusu-Amoah, former Commissioner- General, GRA, who left office in March 2024, also did not declare his assets and liabilities after leaving office. His initial declaration was done in March 2020.

    Rev. Dr. Ammishaddai Owusu-Amoah did not declare his assets when he left office

    In the case of the immediate-past Chief Executive Officer of the National Petroleum Authority (NPA), Mustapha Abdul-Hamid, he declared his assets in February 2023, almost two years after he was appointed to lead the petroleum regulator.  

    The Fourth Estate’s findings come on the back of a recent disclosure from the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) that Mustapha Hamid failed to declare all his properties, as a house he claimed former President Akufo-Addo gifted him was not listed among the assets he declared.

    GACC reacts

    The Executive Director of the Ghana Anti-Corruption Coalition, Beauty Emefa Nartey, says that The Fourth Estate’s findings “reinforce our long-standing assertion that a weak asset declaration enforcement regime signals permission for non-compliance.”

    “The reality is that when eligible declarants perceive little to no consequences for failing to comply with the asset declaration regime, they naturally do not take the process seriously,” she added.

    Ms. Nartey, therefore, made a strong case for the passage of the Conduct of Public Officers Bill, which she believes is critical to the fight against corruption.

    “It offers a real opportunity to address the persistent weaknesses in our current asset declaration framework,” she said. “We need His Excellency the President to champion the enactment of a law that includes a robust verification mechanism, clear enforcement procedures, and the consistent application of sanctions. Ultimately, we should build a culture where asset declaration is embraced as a civic duty, and not as a burden. This is essential for strengthening integrity and public trust in governance.”

    What does the law say?

    Article 286 (1) of the 1992 Constitution states that “a person who holds a public office mentioned in clause (5) of this Article shall submit to the Auditor-General, a written declaration of all property or assets owned by, or liabilities owed by, him whether directly or indirectly (a) within three months after the coming into force of this Constitution or before taking office, as the case may be, (b) at the end of every four years; and (b) at the end of his term of office.”

    The Constitution requires the declaration to be made before the public officer takes office. However, Section 1(4)(c) of the Public Office Holders (Declaration of Assets and Disqualification) Act directs the public office holder to meet this requirement “not later than six months after taking office, at the end of every four years, and not later than six months at the end of his or her term.”

    Currently, Liberia, South Africa, Tanzania, Cape Verde, and São Tomé and Príncipe are the only African countries that allow the publication of assets declared.

    Who must do the declaration?

    The laws require that the President, Vice-President, the Speaker of Parliament, Deputy Speakers of Parliament, Members of Parliament, ministers and deputy ministers of State, ambassadors, the Chief Justice and Judges of superior courts submit to the Auditor-General, written declarations of all property or assets owned or liabilities owed by them, whether directly or indirectly. The laws also mandate appointees of other state institutions to declare their assets and liabilities.

    However, The Fourth Estate’s investigations last year showed a worringly low compliance rate among ministers, judges, and other public officeholders.