Strategic Mobilisation Limited has fired back at the Office of the Special Prosecutor’s quest to recover GH¢125 million, insisting Friday that Ghana’s government actually owes the company money for verified services rendered to the Ghana Revenue Authority.
The counterclaim emerged in a press statement released October 31, just one day after Special Prosecutor Kissi Agyebeng announced plans to prosecute former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta and five other senior officials over what his office describes as unlawful engagement of the revenue assurance contractor. Agyebeng characterized the GH¢125 million as unjust enrichment from overpayments for services that were either substandard, minimally performed, or not rendered at all.
SML’s Communications Department challenged the recovery figure’s basis, stating that reconciled data and verified performance metrics tell a different story. The company maintains that all payments received were tied to verified deliverables under continuous GRA supervision, with technical validation, data reconciliation, and documentary confirmation preceding every disbursement.
The company asserted it generated approximately GH¢20 billion in verified revenue for Ghana through its downstream petroleum audit system, contributing to a 92 percent increase in taxable volumes and a 33 percent rise in import clearance revenue. These figures represent SML’s central argument that its work delivered measurable value despite the Special Prosecutor’s damning assessment.
The dispute centers on contracts SML held with the Ghana Revenue Authority for transaction audits, external price verification, and downstream petroleum audits. President John Dramani Mahama directed immediate termination of all SML contracts following the OSP investigation’s conclusion, with the presidency instructing the Finance Ministry to end existing agreements without delay.
The OSP investigation revealed that SML had no proven record of technical capability, financial strength or experience when first submitted to the Public Procurement Authority for approval in 2017, when the company was barely four months old and had been rejected several times by the PPA for lacking necessary capacity. This timeline raises questions about how SML subsequently secured contracts worth hundreds of millions of cedis.
Agyebeng’s office concluded that automatic payments detached from performance allowed SML to earn fees without delivering corresponding services. The Special Prosecutor explained that variable percentage-based payments created incentives to inflate figures, further increasing undeserved payments. The OSP calculated the GH¢125 million recovery amount using quantum meruit, a legal principle ensuring parties return undue benefits to prevent unjust enrichment.
SML defended its technical credentials in Friday’s statement, noting that the Ghana Standards Authority certified its petroleum monitoring technology as accurate and effective. The company emphasized that its work complements rather than duplicates existing state systems, introducing continuous digital monitoring to address what it described as longstanding weaknesses in manual measurements and fragmented data.
The six individuals facing prosecution include Ernest Akore, who served as Chief of Staff to Ofori-Atta; Emmanuel Kofi Nti and Rev. Ammishaddai Owusu-Amoah, both former Commissioners-General of the Ghana Revenue Authority; and Isaac Crentsil and Kwadwo Damoah, former Commissioners of the Customs Division. Prosecutions are expected to start before November 2025 ends following what the OSP described as overwhelming evidence of procurement irregularities, poor value-for-money outcomes and undeserved payments.
SML clarified its corporate identity in response to circulating reports, stating it’s wholly Ghanaian-owned with no current or former public official controlling shares. The company dismissed as inaccurate and misleading any suggestions of political ownership or links to political figures, addressing persistent speculation about hidden beneficial owners.
The statement also explained SML’s name change from Strategic Mobilisation Enhancement Limited to Strategic Mobilisation Limited as a legitimate corporate rebranding decision for market simplicity and branding clarity. The company denied reports linking it to defunct West Blue Consulting, clarifying that Ghana Link’s ICUMS platform replaced West Blue’s system rather than SML’s technology.
The fixed monthly fee agreed upon in a November 2024 addendum amounted to the cedi equivalent of $1.43 million, or GH¢16.29 million per month inclusive of all taxes at the Bank of Ghana’s exchange rate. The GRA has made no payments to SML since December 2024 due to the ongoing investigation, meaning the company’s revenue stream dried up nearly a year ago.
SML’s Lead Counsel emphasized that all relevant documents will be presented to appropriate authorities, stressing that fairness, transparency, and evidence must guide national conversation. This position contrasts sharply with the Special Prosecutor’s assertion that SML lacked both the tools and technical competence to execute the audit and revenue assurance services it was contracted to perform.
The contracts operated under what SML describes as a risk-and-reward framework where the company assumed operational risk and received compensation only after verified results. This performance-based structure represents standard practice in revenue assurance contracts globally, though critics question whether SML actually delivered measurable improvements justifying the payments received.
Agyebeng stated that SML’s contracts were awarded through self-serving official patronage, sponsorship, and promotion based on false and unverified claims, adding there was no genuine need for the company’s services. This characterization suggests the Special Prosecutor views the entire arrangement as fundamentally flawed rather than simply poorly executed.
The broader context involves Ghana’s ongoing efforts to maximize revenue collection amid fiscal pressures. Revenue assurance contracts typically aim to identify leakages where government loses tax income through underreporting, measurement errors, or outright fraud. Whether SML’s systems actually achieved these objectives or simply created another layer of expense remains central to the dispute.
SML maintains its downstream petroleum audit system introduced transparency and accountability mechanisms that didn’t previously exist. The company points to the Ghana Standards Authority certification as validation of its technical capabilities, though the OSP investigation suggests the equipment and expertise weren’t as sophisticated as claimed.
The timing of contract approvals during the previous administration now attracts scrutiny, particularly given the Public Procurement Authority’s initial rejections. How a four-month-old company lacking proven capacity eventually secured major government contracts represents a question prosecutors will likely explore during forthcoming trials.
Ghana’s experience with revenue assurance contractors has proven contentious across multiple administrations. Previous controversies involved other firms providing similar services, with debates centering on whether private contractors deliver value exceeding their fees or simply extract rents from government coffers without corresponding benefits.
SML concluded its statement by positioning itself as a Ghanaian innovation success story, a private enterprise operating under performance-based frameworks that strengthen revenue mobilization through technology and professional excellence. Whether courts and prosecutors accept this self-characterization or embrace the Special Prosecutor’s narrative of unjust enrichment and procurement violations will unfold in coming months.
The company’s insistence that government owes it money rather than the reverse sets up a potentially lengthy legal battle. If SML possesses documented evidence of services rendered and value delivered, prosecutors may face stronger opposition than anticipated. Conversely, if the OSP investigation withstands scrutiny, SML could face not only the GH¢125 million disgorgement but potential criminal liability for company officials.
As prosecutions approach and legal arguments crystallize, the dispute encapsulates broader questions about how Ghana manages revenue assurance, awards contracts to private firms, and balances innovation incentives against procurement integrity. The outcome will likely influence how future administrations approach similar arrangements with private sector contractors claiming technological solutions to revenue challenges.
