The �Citizen Vigilante�, Martin Amidu has been challenged by the representative of ISOFOTON SA in Ghana, Mr. Anane Agyei Forson to reveal contracts which were executed under his control as deputy A-G during ex-President Rawlings� regime but never through Parliamentary approval.
He urged the media to call Martin Amidu to confirm or deny the allegation of his involvement in a contract which as a deputy A-G under ex-President Rawlings did not go to Parliament for approval in 1998 but the company engaged was allowed to execute the project.
Speaking on Hot FM, he assured that in a short while, he will be the second �Citizen Vigilante� in Ghana as he prepares his documents to go to court to prove that in the era of Martin Amidu as the deputy Attorney-General certain companies went through with their contracts with the then government but without Parliamentary approval.
He again said that in 2005 these same companies went the second Protocol without Parliamentary approval but then under the watch of Hon. Joe Ghartey as the A-G which these companies excuted the contract without any court issue; adding that the Supreme Court must pronounce on them as well because to him what is good for the goose is also good for the gander.
He further said that his contract with the NPP government was abrogated by the then Chief Of Staff, Kwadwo Mpianim of erstwhile Kuffour�s administration because he was part of his cronies; adding that he will have time for this case to expose contracts which were executed without Parliamentary approval, affirming that ISOFOTON SA will surely collect its money from the Ghana government.
He therefore wondered why his company�s contract was abrogated on the grounds that the contract was not before Parliament for approval, whereas the company which took over the contract was allowed to complete and took their money on the project without the procedure upon which Mr. Mpianim annulled the government contract with ISOFOTON.
He however employed the services of the media to find out from the Supreme Court how some contract without Parliamentary approval were allowed to be executed but other contracts were annulled on the same modus operandi.
<<Print>>