By – Sadat Dabo

A High Court in Tamale, presided over by Justice Eric Ansah Ankomah, has convicted the former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Northern Development Authority (NDA), his two former deputies and the Chief Executive of a private consultancy firm over a contract alteration scandal involving millions of Ghana cedis.

The four convicts were each sentenced to a fine of 1,000 penalty units on each count for which they were convicted or, in default of payment, four years in prison

The convictions were secured on Friday, October 23, 2026, after the court found the accused persons guilty on seven out of eleven counts

The case centres on allegations that an original contract valued at GH¢5.72 million was subsequently altered to GH¢10.4 million, raising concerns about procurement integrity, public financial management and accountability in the use of state resources

The convicted persons include :

• Sumaila Abdul-Rahman, former Chief Executive Officer of the Northern Development Authority.
• Stephen Yir-Eru Engmen, former Deputy Chief Executive in charge of Operations.
• Patrick Seidu, former Deputy Chief Executive in charge of Finance and Administration.
• Andrew Kuundaari, Chief Executive of A&QS Consortium Limited, the private company involved in the contract.

The court declined to impose immediate custodial sentences, citing the advanced ages of the convicts and the intervention by the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP), which prevented unlawful payments under the contract

According to the stated reasons for the decision, no financial loss was caused to the Republic because the OSP acted swiftly to stop the payments

How the GH¢5.72m contract allegedly became GH¢10.4m

The case dates back to a consultancy contract awarded under the Infrastructure for Poverty Eradication Programme (IPEP)

On January 16, 2020, the Public Procurement Authority (PPA) approved the use of single-source procurement by the NDA, then under the leadership of Dr Alhassan Anamzoya, to engage consultancy services for the implementation of the programme

The contract was valued at GH¢5,720,000 and awarded to A&QS Consortium Limited

However, following Dr Anamzoya’s departure from office, the contract was allegedly altered, with a purportedly forged signature attributed to the former CEO

The alteration reportedly increased the contract sum to GH¢10.4 million, representing an increase of GH¢4.68 million over the original approved amount

The alleged alteration raised questions about how the contract was amended, who authorised the changes and why the revised amount was processed despite concerns about the authenticity of the documentation

The matter became public in 2023 following media exposés that drew attention to the alleged contract inflation

OSP prosecution followed complaint by Martin Kpebu

The Office of the Special Prosecutor investigated and prosecuted the case following a complaint lodged by legal practitioner Martin Kpebu

The prosecution focused on the alleged manipulation of the contract and the circumstances under which the revised contract sum was processed

The OSP’s intervention was significant to the court’s sentencing considerations because it prevented the disputed payments from resulting in financial loss to the state

GH¢84,000 each: Is the fine the end of the matter

The sentence has placed renewed attention on the consequences of alleged wrongdoing involving public contracts and the balance courts must strike between punishment, deterrence and mitigating circumstances

While the court imposed fines rather than immediate imprisonment, the possibility of a four-year custodial sentence remains for each applicable count in the event of default of payment, according to the sentence outlined in the case

The stated fine of 1,000 penalty units is approximately GH¢84,000 at a value of GH¢84 per penalty unit. The total amount payable by each convict will depend on the number of counts to which the fine applies

The distinction is important because the four accused persons were convicted on seven counts collectively, not necessarily seven counts each

The case is likely to fuel further public debate about accountability for public officials, the integrity of procurement processes and whether financial penalties provide sufficient deterrence in cases involving public funds

Source – gbcuraonline.com

St