ELS: MBN360 NEWS
The Second Deputy Minority Whip, Jerry Ahmed Shaib, has dismissed claims that Deputy Minority Leader and Asokwa MP Patricia Appiagyei returned GH¢70,000 allegedly given to her for vetting of ministers and Supreme Court nominees.
Speaking to Citi News, Mr Ahmed described the letter circulating on social media as fake, saying Mrs Appiagyei herself had confirmed that she had no knowledge of where the document came from or who authored it
“She has confirmed that she has no idea where the letter emanated from or who authored it,” Mr Ahmed said.
The purported letter claimed that Mrs Appiagyei had returned GH¢70,000 because she did not know the source of the money and did not want to personally benefit from the vetting of government officials and Supreme Court nominees.
It also purportedly referenced the Minority’s decision not to participate in the vetting of three Supreme Court nominees, citing concerns over the process.
Read also:
- CDD-Ghana calls on Chief Justice to avoid partisan political commentary
- MPMI @30: Three Decades of God’s Faithfulness Celebrated as Anniversary Begins
- FDA Orders Arcan Bitters Recall Over Sildenafil Citrate Adulteration
- Ayariga Pledges High Rise Housing To Transform Korle Lagoon Slum
- Foreign Ministry Affirms Zero Tolerance for Middlemen After Attestation Fee Exposé
However, Mr Ahmed said checks had also been made on the Majority side of Parliament, with officials indicating that no such letter or payment had originated from them.
The denial adds another dimension to the controversy surrounding reports of financial allocations allegedly made to members of Parliament’s Appointments Committee in connection with the vetting of nominees.
The purported letter had generated public debate over the propriety of MPs receiving money in relation to their work on the Appointments Committee.
The Minority’s latest position, however, is that the document being circulated in Mrs Appiagyei’s name is not genuine.
Mr Ahmed said the matter should therefore be treated with caution as questions remain over the source and authorship of the document.
The controversy comes as Parliament faces growing scrutiny over the conduct of the Appointments Committee and allegations surrounding financial arrangements linked to the vetting of presidential nominees.
