Private legal practitioner Martin Kpebu has criticized former President John Dramani Mahama in the context of the Airbus bribery scandal, suggesting that while no direct evidence of bribery was found against him, the situation remains troubling.
Kpebu, speaking on TV3’s Key Points on August 10, emphasized that Ghanaians are aware of the deeper issues surrounding the scandal despite the current findings.
Kpebu remarked that the lack of evidence in the Office of the Special Prosecutor’s (OSP) report does not absolve Mahama of wrongdoing.
“The fact that Mahama’s brother received funds raises questions about their potential use in supporting Mahama’s political campaign,” he said.
He criticized the notion that the OSP’s report should be seen as a definitive closure to the case, suggesting instead that it merely represents a temporary pause.
According to Kpebu, the case could be revisited if future investigations uncover incriminating evidence. “Mahama’s situation appears fortunate due to the broader context of corruption involving Akufo-Addo and Bawumia,” Kpebu added.
He is sceptical about the current conclusions, stressing that any evidence of financial transactions involving high-ranking officials should be thoroughly scrutinized.
The OSP’s recent report confirmed that Mahama was identified as “Government Official One” in the Airbus investigation by both UK and US courts.
The OSP clarified that Mahama, Vice President of Ghana from January 7, 2009, to July 24, 2012, was implicated in the scandal.
The Airbus scandal involves the acquisition of three C295 military aircraft by Ghana, with the first two delivered in November 2011 and April 2012 and the third in November 2015.
The transactions were part of a more considerable modernization effort for the Ghanaian Air Force, funded through loans from Deutsche Bank S.A.E., Fidelity Bank Ghana Limited, and the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES).
Despite parliamentary approval of these loans, opposition figures such as Minority Leader Osei Kyei-Mensah-Bonsu criticized the deals as opaque and inflated.
The criticisms included allegations of questionable contract sums, though these claims were initially dismissed.
Recent legal judgments from England’s Crown Court have reignited scrutiny of these deals. On January 21, 2020, the court approved a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) between the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and Airbus SE following revelations of widespread bribery by the aircraft manufacturer.
The court’s decision to allow the DPA was based on its determination that prosecuting Airbus immediately could have severe economic repercussions, including job losses and significant financial damage to the company.
The SFO’s investigations revealed that Airbus engaged in bribery schemes across multiple countries, including Ghana.
While not naming specific individuals, the court documents noted that bribes were paid through intermediaries linked to high-ranking Ghanaian officials involved in the aircraft procurement process.
The DPA does not shield Airbus or its officials from future prosecution. Should Airbus fail to adhere to the agreement’s terms, the SFO retains the authority to pursue legal action.
Ongoing investigations could lead to charges against those directly involved in the bribery schemes, including intermediaries in Ghana.
Legal proceedings could be potentially facilitated through Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) provisions under English law.
