<<Print>>

Former British diplomat Craig Murray was perfectly right when he described his native country as the biggest hypocrites who engage in international corruption. Such hypocrisy is reinforced today as a so-called top UK prosecutor in the person of John Hardy takes the podium at a forum organized by the Danquah Institute to speak on how to curb international corruption. John Hardy is currently the scorn in legal circles in the United Kingdom for the shoddy job he did as prosecutor in the Mabey & Johnson trial. Already, principle Britons are questioning the locus standi and moral basis for John Hardy to lecture Ghana on how to curb international corruption at a time his government led by tony Blair and now Gordon Brown stopped the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) from investigating a British company involved in international corruption. Top UK legal luminary Davies Owen QC faulted the prosecution in the Mabey & Johnson case for mentioning the names of third parties in open court when in fact they were not present to respond to the charges. Legal experts observe that this basic rule of audi alteram partem � meaning �hear or listen to the other side� was breached by the SFO prosecution. According to them, any person trained in investigation should have this elementary rule at his or her finger tips. For the record: Some Ghanaians including Dr. Sipa Yankey who were mentioned as alleged recipients of bribe money were never contacted for their side of the story to be heard. John Hardy, on Joy yesterday failed to offer any answer in that regard. While the British SFO mentioned the names of Ghanaians who allegedly received the bribes, they hid the names of the Mabey & Johnson directors who gave the bribes. All over the world, both the giver and the receiver of bribes are all guilty before the law. But, John Hardy, a self-acclaimed top prosecutor failed to recognize this. He told newsmen yesterday that because Mabey & Johnson directors were still under investigation, it was necessary to withhold their names so as not to influence the outcome. �What a weird logic?� a Ghanaian lawyer screamed yesterday in an interview with this reporter. The lawyer, (identity being withheld for obvious reasons), noted that the mention of the names of the bribe givers would have added to the track-record of the people anytime an investigation is opened against them. He said by that very approach, further investigation would be made easy. The issue gets interesting as former directors of Mabey & Johnson who were at post at the time the company got contracts to build bridges in Ghana, have vehemently denied ever paying bribes to Ghanaian officials. The paradox of this situation is that current directors of Mabey & Johnson reported themselves to the British SFO claiming that their predecessors paid bribes. How these new directors who were not at post in the 1990s could be substantiating bribery allegations. Daily Post�s earlier impeccable reports stated that the British SFO and the new directors of Mabey & Johnson agreed on a plea bargaining which led to some fine imposed on the latter. The allegations, for the record, were not proved in the proceedings at the Southwark Crown Court. John Hardy was cautioned at all material times by the judge not to mention the names of the alleged bribe recipients but he threw his ethical rules to the dogs and did the otherwise. The Mabey & Johnson scandal is interpreted as �Much Ado About Nothing�. The SFO Director, Richard Alderman has in a series of correspondence to Dr. Sipa Yankey admitted that there was no case against the former Minister of Health. Many have viewed this as a swift retreat the SFO made in the allegations it has made. The SFO was asked by lawyers for Sipa Yankey to produce receipts of alleged payments made to their client, but it was unable to do so. So the lame and useless talk by John Hardy that Ghanaians officials could face prosecution is most outrageous and cynical. Why couldn�t he as a professional prosecutor made sure Dr. Sipa Yankey who has sojourned in the UK for many years but had to be called by the Mills administration to help in governance not extradited to face trial? John Hardy�s professional foolhardy is most sickening. Ghana�s Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) is currently trapped in the abyss, as it does not have much evidence to proceed on the case. Craig Murray, a former deputy British High Commissioner to Ghana has advised the UK to check its companies that have been engaged in corruption in Africa and at home. Perhaps, John Hardy should take a cue from this and lecture Downing Street how to curb international corruption. John Hardy is the epitome of a neocolonialist whose primary preoccupation is to dent the hard-won reputation of Ghana. Political pundits and observers have stated that if Ghana was in the hands of days-of-old progressive elements like Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, John Hardy would have been chased out of town.