Flagbearer of the opposition National Democratic Congress(NDC), Ex-President John Mahama has expressed surprise over the decision by the Special Prosecutor, Martin Amidu to comment on the Airbus saga in a report on the controversial Agyapa Royalties deal.
According to Mr. Mahama, it is obvious Mr. Amidu inserted that paragraph on the Airbus issue just to equalize for the damning Agyapa deal which was released by his(Amidu’s) office.
The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) says it has established the identity of the elected Government official 1 in the Airbus SE scandal as former President John Dramani Mahama.
According to the Special Prosecutor, Mr Martin Amidu, “the only reason the former President [Mahama] has not been invited for interrogation (in spite of all threats from some of his followers and lawyers) is the fact that he got himself an insurance as the Presidential candidate of the other largest political party in Ghana.”
He argued that “prudence dictated that the interrogation be held in abeyance during this election season.”
Mr Amidu stated these as part of his observations in the corruption risk assessment report on the Agyapa Royalties deal which he submitted to the Office of the President on October 16, 2020.
Mr Amidu also indicated that former President Mahama as of now has not offered to make any voluntary statement to his Office (OSP) despite the publication of an alleged interview containing admissions purportedly made by the former President to a Daily Graphic reporter without the full voice recording which in the meantime remains just hearsay.
But commenting further on the issue in an interview on Morning Starr on Starr FM Tuesday, Ex-President Mahama said “I’m surprised, it is obvious this damning report was coming out and I’m disappointed in Martin Amidu to have put this paragraph there just to equalize and bring Airbus up as if it was a major issue.”
He added: “I have had my say on the Airbus issue, no financial benefit accrued to me…not a single dollar. There’s no basis, you are talking about a deferred prosecution agreement in which nobody’s name was mentioned and yet there’s been an inference that it must be this person or that person. So legally he has no basis to proceed, on what document is he proceeding? Who has he spoken to, what investigations have he conducted he should come out and tell us“.