Richard Jakpa’s Main Claims During Cross-Examination During the cross-examination by lawyers representing Ato Forson, Richard Jakpa, a former Head of Finance at the National Procurement Authority (NPA), made the following key claims: 1. He Acted on Instructions: Jakpa stated that he played a limited role in the procurement process and acted solely on instructions from his superiors, including the then Acting CEO of NPA, Samuel Sarpong. 2. Lack of Involvement in Price Manipulation: Jakpa denied any involvement in manipulating the prices of contracts awarded by NPA. He claimed that the price evaluations were conducted by a technical committee, and he only processed payments based on the recommendations of this committee. 3. No Contractual Authority: Jakpa emphasized that he did not have any contractual authority to award contracts or make payments to contractors. His role, he said, was purely administrative, such as processing invoices and issuing payment certificates. 4. Integrity of Payment Process: Jakpa asserted that the payment process at NPA was robust and transparent. He explained that payments were made only after contracts were fully executed and the goods or services delivered. 5. Collaboration with National Security: Jakpa claimed that NPA worked closely with the National Security Secretariat to verify the identities of contractors and ensure due diligence. He stated that he personally coordinated with the National Security operatives on such matters. 6. Lack of Personal Gain: Jakpa denied allegations that he received any personal benefits or incentives from the procurement process. He maintained that he acted with integrity and in the best interests of the government. 7. No Interference in Investigations: Jakpa assured the court that he had not interfered with any investigations into the NPA procurement saga. He expressed his willingness to cooperate fully and provide any necessary information to the authorities. These claims made by Richard Jakpa during cross-examination are subject to further scrutiny and evaluation as the trial proceedings continue.Jakpa’s Cross-Examination Reveals Alleged Political Interference in Ambulance Procurement CaseJakpa’s Cross-Examination Reveals Alleged Political Interference in Ambulance Procurement Case During a rigorous cross-examination led by Dr. Aziz Bamba, Richard Jakpa, the third defendant in the ambulance procurement case, disclosed crucial details about his interactions with the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Godfred Dame. Jakpa alleged that Dame had asked for his cooperation and promised to release him if he refrained from presenting a case. Allegations of Attorney General’s Involvement Jakpa claimed that Dame had explicitly stated that the primary target of the case was Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson, the former Deputy Minister of Finance. Jakpa also revealed that he had met with Dame at the residence of Supreme Court Justice Yonni Kulendi, who is his cousin. Standard Procedures for Government Contracts Jakpa explained the typical communication procedures for government contracts. According to him, letters are usually sent from chief directors’ secretaries or deputy ministers’ offices to the substantive Finance Minister’s office. Upon approval, the Secretary would stamp the authorization on the letter. Only then could the Comptroller and Accountant General Department (CAGD) or the Bank of Ghana (BoG) proceed with the instructions in the letter. Allegations of Political Motive Jakpa further claimed that former Health Minister Kwaku Agyemang-Manu had informed him that the ambulance case had been taken over by the New Patriotic Party (NPP) headquarters to award new contracts to party businessmen. Implications for the Case Jakpa’s testimony has raised questions about potential political interference in the ambulance procurement case. The Deputy Attorney General, Alfred Tuah-Yeboah, however, maintains that the audio recordings admitted into evidence do not provide sufficient evidence to affect the outcome of the case. State’s Response State prosecutors will have an opportunity to interrogate Jakpa further on June 18. They will likely seek to refute Jakpa’s allegations and present their evidence to support the prosecution’s case. Disclaimer The article emphasizes that the views expressed by contributors on the platform do not necessarily represent the views of the media organization.During cross-examination by Ato Forson’s lawyers, Richard Jakpa asserted the following claims: 1. He was not involved in the disbursement of the 200 million Ghana cedis allocated for the payment of petroleum subsidies. 2. He was not aware of any alleged kickbacks or bribes connected to the fuel subsidy program. 3. He had no knowledge of any wrongdoing or illegalities committed by Ato Forson or his associates. 4. The prosecution’s evidence against him and Ato Forson was based on assumptions and speculations. 5. He had consistently denied any involvement in any criminal activity and maintained his innocence throughout the trial.