The Office of Special Prosecutor (OSP) has cleared former President John Mahama of any bribery and wrongdoing following its investigations into the Airbus SE scandal that began in February 2020.
Special Prosecutor Casey Agyepeng said in a press conference on Thursday, August 8, 2024, that following his investigations, he was unable to prove any evidence to suggest that John Mahama or any public official received bribes from Airbus SE.
Consequently, the OSO found no evidentiary basis to suggest that Samuel Adam Foster (also known as Samuel Adam Mahama), Philip Sean Middleworth and Lyn Sarah Davies acted as conduits for bribery between Airbus employees and former President John Mahama or any other public official.
OSO also found no evidentiary basis to suggest that Samuel Adam Mahama, Philip Sean Mederts and Lyn Sarah Davies received payments from Airbus with the aim of bribing former President John Dramani Mahama or any other public official.
Furthermore, the OSO has found no evidentiary basis to suggest that former President John Mahama or any other public official received bribes from Samuel Adam Foster aka Samuel Adam Mahama, Philip Sean Midmerth, and Lyn Sarah Davies in connection with the government’s purchase of He pointed out that Ghana possesses military transport aircraft from Airbus.
John Dramani Mahama, former president and flagbearer of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) was the vice president at the time of the incident.
Background research
Details of the Airbus bribery scandal
Ghana has purchased three military aircraft – C295s – from Airbus. The nation received its first C295 in November 2011. The second aircraft was received in April 2012 and the third in November 2015.
John Dramani Mahama, former president and flagbearer of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) was the vice president at the time of the incident.
The deals it covered were said at the time to be in line with the 2009-2012 Strategic Plan of the Ghana Armed Forces.
All three purchases, which were approved by the Parliament of Ghana after heated disagreements in parliament, were comprehensively marketed by the government of the time as a drive to modernize the Ghana Air Force.
Financing the purchase of aircraft
Financing for the first two C295 aircraft came from a €60,034,636 loan facility from Deutsche Bank SAE.
Parliament also approved an additional loan of €11,750,000 million from Fidelity Bank Ghana Limited during this period for the purchase of two DA42 MPP Guardian surveillance aircraft for the Ghana Air Force.
The House of Representatives also approved a total loan amount of US$105,370,177.09 from the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES) to purchase the Embraer E190 aircraft for the country. The Embraer agreement was supposed to cover relevant spare parts and accessories as well as the construction of a hangar large enough to accommodate three large aircraft.
Before Parliament approved the loan agreements, Minority Leader Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu criticized the deals as questionable and non-transparent, adding that the government had underfunded the contract amounts.
He famously provided figures sourced from the Internet to back up his claims, but was mocked for doing little more than relying on Google to come up with such serious allegations of wrongdoing.
One of the C295 aircraft acquired under the deal supports UN-led missions in Mali. The remainder was purchased, as the government explained at the time, to support the strategic operations of the Ghana Air Force including monitoring the country’s offshore oil production fields, border patrols, pilot training and inland transportation of troops.
In November 2014, President John Mahama announced that Ghana was planning to acquire more military equipment, including five Super Tucanos, a Mi-17, and four Z-9s for the Ghana Air Force.
At the time, it was said that the Ghanaian forces relied heavily on civilian flights for their movements and needed military aircraft to correct this anomaly. Despite opposition criticism, the government went ahead with the purchase agreements.
UK court ruling
A recent ruling by England’s Crown Court in Southwark now appears to have given new life to previous suspicions that agreements covering C295 aircraft in particular were corrupt. The decision of 21 January 2020 approved a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) between the SFO and Airbus SE, an Airbus subsidiary, after investigations revealed massive bribery scandals involving the aircraft manufacturer in breach of the Bribery Act 2010 .
English law allows the SFO to postpone the prosecution of an organization based on an agreement between the SFO and a company or companies suspected of committing economic crimes.
Such an agreement (DPA) requires a judicial stamp of approval to become legal, and may allow the offending organization to avoid prosecution altogether.
In its decision on such requests, the Court takes into account, among other things, whether the Darfur Peace Agreement before it is in the public interest.
The terms of the agreement must be fair, reasonable and proportionate.
In this case, the Court found that the Darfur Peace Agreement was in the public interest and that the terms agreed met the standards of fairness, reasonableness and proportionality.
The court held that prosecuting Airbus now would result, among other things, in the loss of a large number of jobs and damage the company’s performance on the stock market in the immediate and long term.
Independent estimates suggest that Airbus could easily lose around £200bn in the long term if it faces immediate prosecution.
The ruling said the SFO’s investigations found that Airbus – which has since agreed to pay fines of more than £3 billion – had engaged in schemes involving bribery its way to lucrative contracts in countries such as Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Indonesia and Ghana. .
French and US authorities also found similar evidence of alleged bribery involving Airbus officials and/or their agents in other countries, including Russia and China.
In the case of Ghana, the Crown Court ruling highlights instances where Airbus officials, as part of a scheme to obtain or maintain contracts with the government, either bribed or agreed to bribe intermediaries with close links to a high-ranking government official said to have influence over plans Purchasing aircraft in the country between 2011 and 2015.
Court documents did not mention any names, but the time frame set out in the ruling covered some periods of the Mills-Mahama era.
The first bribe agreement in Ghana was to involve about €5 million, which was disguised as a commission to an intermediary – “Broker 5” – employed by Airbus to promote its proposal to sell two C295 aircraft to Ghana. Ultimately, due diligence was conducted to reveal the suspicious arrangements and no money was paid.
Ultimately, due process tests revealed the suspicious arrangements and no money was paid.
Airbus’ subsequent approaches were successful, resulting in Ghana purchasing 3 C259 aircraft through the company’s Spanish defense subsidiaries at separate times.
The deals were arranged through a number of middlemen led by “Broker 5,” who was said to be an unnamed relative of a powerful Ghanaian official who was, at the time, in the decision-making position on the proposed aircraft purchase agreements.
However, after an internal investigation revealed the relationship between Broker 5 and an unnamed high-ranking government official in Ghana, a scheme was devised by both parties to route the transaction through a third-party Hispanic company, with which the company had no prior dealings in Ghana.
The Spanish company was deemed to be a facilitator of the proposed aircraft purchase agreements, when in fact it was only included in the arrangements to circumvent due diligence requirements in order to give the questionable deal a clean bill of health. In concluding the deal with Ghana, under which two aircraft were initially sold, Airbus or its agents relied on false statements and documents to pay bribe amounts approaching €4 million to the Spanish third-party company which in turn transferred the payments to an intermediary. .
The payments were disguised as a commission on the contract amount. The Spanish third-party company withdrew from a subsequent deal that delivered Ghana its third C259 aircraft. This came after Airbus appointed an external consultant to conduct due diligence on it. Broker 5’s subsequent claim that Airbus owed him approximately €1.6 million under the deal covering the third C295 aircraft was not met.
The Darfur Peace Agreement does not mean that Airbus and its officials enjoy immunity from prosecution for alleged crimes.
Under English law, the SFO has the right, in due course, to prosecute Airbus if it is satisfied that the company has failed to comply with the terms of the court-approved DPA.
Indeed, the ongoing investigations mean that while the SFO may, in light of Airbus’ cooperation to date, abandon its pursuit of the aircraft manufacturer, it may, following investigations, bring criminal proceedings against people who have actually paid or received Bribery is the subject of the complaint.
The move is likely to include intermediaries in Ghana and related individuals. In such a case, the SFO may rely on the mutual legal assistance (MLA) provisions under English law to raise the relevant fees.
Disclaimer: The views, comments, opinions, contributions and statements made by readers and contributors on this page do not necessarily represent the opinions or policy of LamarBlogspot. Please report any inappropriate content to us so we can prioritize its evaluation.