…As they drag case to CHRAJ, CID, OSP
The Minority in Parliament, has formally petitioned three key state investigative institutions the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Ghana Police Service, and the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) to probe the controversial dollar gift involving the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Ghana Gold Board, Sammy Gyamfi.
This is in spite of President John Dramani Mahama’s declaration on Wednesday, May 14, 2025, that he would take no further disciplinary action against Gyamfi.
Interestingly, the undisclosed sum of US dollars was given to evangelist Patricia Asiedua Asiamah, widely known as Nana Agradaa, who supported the NPP’s 2024 election campaign and its Presidential candidate, Dr Mahamudu Bawumia.
Sammy Gyamfi, was captured in a viral video publicly handing the cash to the lady, a former fetish priestess.
The President indicated that he had accepted Gyamfi’s public apology and considered the matter concluded, though he accompanied the acceptance with a stern caution.
Despite this, the Minority has rejected the President’s resolution of the issue, insisting that Sammy Gyamfi’s conduct demands independent scrutiny and cannot be dismissed with an apology alone.
They argue that the findings of these investigations should inform the president’s conclusive decision regarding Gyamfi’s future in public office.
Mumuni Mohammed Nurudeen, the Member of Parliament (MP) for Nalerigu/Gambaga, is leading the charge.
He is joined in the petition by the Minority Whip, Habib Iddrisu, and the Deputy General Secretary of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Haruna Mohammed.
The Minority contends that the petitioned institutions must uncover the full facts of the dollar gift saga and determine whether Gyamfi’s actions contravened public service ethics, anti-corruption statutes, or administrative protocols.
But Dr Joshua Jebuntie Zaato, a senior lecturer at the University of Ghana’s Political Science Department, has criticised the National Democratic Congress (NDC), claiming the party lacks the courage to hold Sammy Gyamfi accountable over the recent dollar gift controversy.
He was reacting to President Mahama’s decision not to pursue further disciplinary action against the acting CEO of the Ghana Gold Board.
Dr Zaato, stated that President Mahama’s response was unsurprising, citing Gyamfi’s significant influence and strategic role within the party.
He explained that Gyamfi’s visibility and vocal presence make it nearly impossible for anyone in the NDC to question or challenge him, even in the face of controversy.
Speaking on Channel One TV’s Breakfast Daily on Thursday, May 15, he said the president’s reaction, though eyebrow-raising for some, was anticipated due to internal party dynamics and the loyalty Gyamfi commands among top party members.
“No matter how you look at these issues, no one in this country will say they are surprised by this development. If you look at the politics and who the person is, nobody will say he or she is surprised that the president took only the apology and let it go,” Dr. Zaato stated.
He suggested that President Mahama’s leniency was driven by a desire to maintain internal party cohesion and avoid alienating a powerful figure whose influence continues to shape the NDC’s public narrative.
“This man is so big, so important to the NDC that there is no one in the party who has the balls to go out and tell the president to fire Sammy Gyamfi,” he declared.
Dr Zaato, further argued that the absence of dissent following the scandal demonstrates just how entrenched Gyamfi’s power has become within the party. He noted that rather than face internal criticism, the embattled party communicator received open support from both party loyalists and government officials.
“There is nobody in the NDC who has the stature and the power like Sammy Gyamfi to go and tell the president to fire him. That is why when this issue happened, almost every government appointee fell in line. They were all whipped into line. Some of them went on national television, adding their support to him.
“The problem is this: when the president came to power, he wanted to establish that he was different from the former president. But how different can you claim to be when your response to such a serious incident is merely to accept an apology and move on?” he added.