The Minority caucus has challenged the authority of Foreign Affairs Minister Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa to demand a refund from former Ghanaian Ambassador to the United States, Hajia Alima Mahama, over findings contained in a special audit of Ghana’s embassy in Washington, D.C.

Damongo MP and Ranking Member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Samuel A. Jinapor, says the power to disallow and surcharge public officers following an audit rests solely with the Auditor-General.

He is questioning the legal basis for the Minister’s decision to demand that the former ambassador personally refund monies allegedly linked to the audit.

“Article 187 of our national Constitution establishes the Office of the Auditor-General and guarantees its independence. The power to disallow and impose a surcharge following an audit is vested solely in the Auditor-General under Article 187(7). It, therefore, begs the question of what authority the Hon. Minister for Foreign Affairs purported to write his letter requesting the former Ambassador to refund the alleged monies,” he said.

The Minority’s position follows a special audit by the Auditor-General into the operations of the Ghana Embassy in Washington, D.C., covering January 2017 to June 2025.

The controversy intensified after Mr Ablakwa wrote to Hajia Alima Mahama demanding the refund of monies allegedly arising from the audit.

The former ambassador subsequently responded to the demand.

Mr Jinapor argues that even if the Auditor-General had issued a surcharge, the affected person would still have a right to challenge it.

“Even where the Auditor-General has exercised his power of surcharge, a person surcharged has sixty (60) days within which to pay the money or exercise his right of appeal to the High Court, which is guaranteed by Article 187(9) of the Constitution and section 17 of the Audit Service Act, 2000 (Act 584),” he said.

He contends that the procedure adopted by the Foreign Affairs Minister could deny the former ambassador that opportunity.

“The procedure adopted by the Hon. Minister for Foreign Affairs seeks to circumvent this laid procedure and curtail the former Ambassador's appeal against surcharges,” Mr Jinapor added.

The Minority also raised concerns about the former ambassador’s claim that she was not given an opportunity to respond to the audit findings.

Mr Jinapor highlighted her statement that “the auditors neither spoke to me nor wrote to me to respond to any issue/observation.”

He said due process required that she be given a hearing if wrongdoing had been established against her.

The Minority further questioned why the refund demand covers activities between 2019 and 2025, despite Hajia Alima Mahama’s tenure as ambassador covering only part of that period.

Mr Jinapor noted that the Foreign Affairs Minister was in office from June 2021 to November 2024, while the audit covers a much wider period.

“Nowhere in the audit report is it suggested that the amounts being demanded occurred only during the tenure of Ms Mahama. Why will the former Ambassador be held accountable for matters that occurred prior to her assumption of office and those that occurred after leaving office?” he asked.

The Minority also pointed out that the special audit report has not yet been laid before Parliament.

It said Section 16 of the Audit Service Act requires the Auditor-General to submit special audit reports to Parliament for deliberation.

According to Mr Jinapor, the demand for repayment was made before any personal or joint liability had been established against Hajia Alima Mahama.

He said the Minority supports efforts to recover public funds but insists that such action must follow the law.

“We will support every lawful effort to protect and recover public funds, but we will equally insist that such efforts are undertaken within the bounds of the law,” he said.