The Member of Parliament for North Tongu, Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa, has criticized the Ghanaian government's decision to terminate a power purchase agreement with the Ghana Power Generation Company (GPGC), resulting in a $170 million judgment debt.
Hon. Ablakwa believes the move was “reckless” and has raised concerns about the government's allocation of funds for the settlement.
The GPGC agreement, cancelled by the Akufo-Addo government based on a committee's recommendations during the power crisis of the National Democratic Congress era, has faced backlash due to the financial repercussions on the nation.
A letter intercepted by Ablakwa revealed that the Ministry of Finance has ordered a payment of $20 million as part of the $170 million judgment debt.
Hon. Ablakwa, in a Facebook post, criticized the government for prioritizing this payment over pressing issues such as emergency housing for flood victims.
“The Akufo-Addo/Bawumia/Ofori-Atta government claims it's so broke that they cannot provide emergency housing for VRA-induced flood victims, but fresh intercepted documents reveal that they have authorized the release of a staggering GH¢230.5 million (US$20 million) to pay for a judgment debt they recklessly & wickedly created,” he stated.
A letter signed by Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta, dated November 11, 2023, confirmed the release of the said sum as part of the settlement for the arbitral award to GPGC.
During an interview, Ablakwa expressed regret over the missed opportunity to use the judgment debt for emergency resettlement centres for Akosombo flood victims.
He urged the government to appeal to reduce the figures and emphasized the avoidability of the situation if the power purchase agreement had run its term.
Hon. Ablakwa concluded by stating, “Sometimes, when you see the recklessness and the bad decisions of some of our leaders, you wonder. It's the taxpayers who bear the brunt.”
The Ghana Power Generation Company took legal action against the Government of Ghana after the termination in 2018, demanding compensation for a breach of the contract.
The court awarded the company $170 million, a decision upheld by a UK court