https://www.myjoyonline.com/dzamefe-report-analysis-the-30-most-frequently-asked-questions/-------https://www.myjoyonline.com/dzamefe-report-analysis-the-30-most-frequently-asked-questions/

In this multi-part series, #JoySports Gary Al-Smith breaks down the voluminous 2014 World Cup Commission report into chewable bites.

This first edition looks at the most salient points in the first 100 pages of the report.

-

What’s the Dzamefe report?

It is a 396-paged document (from cover to cover) that is a result of a Commission of Inquiry set up by President John Mahama to look into how and why Ghana flopped so badly at the last World Cup.

How long did the commission work for?

Four months. The final report was submitted on February 10, 2015 to the President. But the report says the three-man commission worked from August 4, 2014 to December 11, 2014.

What’s the make-up of the report?

It comprises three thematic areas: introductory matters, core recommendations and general issues as well as legacy recommendations and policy directions.

What are the main adverse findings?

The commission noted three main adverse findings in the entire World Cup effort namely:

1. That most of the procurement done by the World Cup supporters’ project team did not follow laid down procurements policy or Ghana’s Public Procurement Act 2003 (Act 663)

2. That organization by way of airlifting and feeding of supporters was not well documented.

3. That there were questionable costs throughout the process of organizing Ghana’s World Cup participation.

‘Questionable costs’? What’s that?

Simply put, monies spent that could be not verified or accounted for.

Did the report mention exact amounts not accounted for?  

Yes, throughout the report we get bits and bobs. But the overall summary of expenses that could not be supported by third party vouchers totaled $1,285,797.

Who were cited as those who could not account for these amounts?

There were four main entities, namely:

Kwesi Nyantakyi - Report recommended the Ghana FA president pays $412,500 being World Cup appearance fees that could not be accounted for. Many readers would know as the infamous ‘coefficient’ monies.

Travel Matters – Could not account for $75,150 being the number of match tickets (for Ghana v Germany and Ghana v Portugal) that were not used but were still paid for by the state. Travel Matters was one of the three travel agencies shortlisted to airlift supporters to Brazil and take care of the settling needs.

Gorsel Ltd – A website company, it has been asked to refund $13,757, being payment made for a Ghana-centric 2014 World Cup website which was not completed but was fully paid for.

Elvis Afriyie Ankrah – The sports minister at the time of the entire fiasco is asked to refund $31, 053 for general expenditures without supporting documentation.

Elvis Afriyie Ankrah (again) – Asked to refund a separate GH¢15,000. The former minister said this money was used to transport three busloads of supporters (at about 5,000 cedis per trip) from the Accra Sports Stadium to the Kotoka International Airport, a distance of 7.5km.

He has denied these charges.

What’s the total amount the report recommends be refunded to the state?

The above figures (Nyantakyi + Travel Matters + Gorsel + Afriyie Ankrah) come to $743,660 and GH¢15,000.

What is the GFA supposed to be investigated for?

In short, the report says the GFA were given (and misused/embezzled) $2 million by GNPC and $1.5 million by FIFA for the same thing, that is, to organize friendly matches for the Black Stars to prepare them for Brazil.

And has the GFA president been cited too?

Yes. The report wants Nyantakyi investigated (separately from the GFA as a body) for being unable to show documentation for a $200,000 imprest from the sports ministry to organize a friendly game during the 2014 World Cup qualifying period.  

Now, to the hearings. How many witnesses testified during the hearings?

87 (Eighty-seven).

Who were the key ones?

Reps from the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Youth & Sports, Bank of Ghana, travel agents, heads of supporters project committees, ambassadors, caterers, GFA, and individuals.

Did the commission find how the 612 state-sponsored Ghana supporters were airlifted to Brazil?

The state paid for it through monies accrued from sponsorship and other means.

So the state got sponsorship from corporate entities and then used that money to fly supporters?

Yes, that was the plan.

Okay, so how much sponsorship cash was realized from corporate Ghana?

Elvis Afriyie Ankrah and his team raised GH¢ 4,542, 735 by appealing to private and state-owned institutions.

How much of this money was actually used?

GH¢ 4,407,275, leaving a cash balance of GH¢ 135, 460.

Do we know where the balance is?

No. The former sports minister has always maintained that he left the money in the ministry’s accounts. Even though two ministers [Mahama Ayariga and now Mustapha Ahmed] have succeeded him in that position, none has been able to confirm the location of that money despite repeated media requests.

But, wait a minute…did you say state-owned institutions donated cash too?

Yes.

State-owned enterprises like…?

[All amounts in GH¢] SSNIT – 1 million; ECG – 50,000; ADB – 250,000; GCB Bank – 300,000; Bank of Ghana – 250,000, Metro Mass Transport – 1,235; VRA – 53,500; Ghana Free Zones Board – 100,000; Ghana AIDS Commission – 3,500; Merchant Bank – 5,500; Ghana Cocoa Board – 53,900; Produce Buying Company – 2,000; GRIDCO – 50,000; National Lotteries Authority – 250,000; Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority – 3,600.

What about the widely publicized ‘text-and-win promotion’?    

Oh, yeah. The sports ministry did a text-and-win drive to get more cash, but the report calls this initiative a ‘financial disaster’ because the amount raised from the effort (GH¢ 145, 301) was just 4% of its expected target.

Is it true Ghana paid more than $600,000 in ‘ways and means’ to officials like referees and so on?

Yes. ‘Ways and means’ is a popular football term for miscellaneous expenditure used in lubricating the many facets of the game.

Around the world, most of this expenditure is not properly documented.

According to the report, the GFA spent $685,000 in unclassified and indemnity payments which [the GFA said] “are provisions in the budget which the Ministry releases for contingencies not defined in the budget and have since been treated as unaccountable imprest.”

This is a lot of English. Simply put, this was miscellaneous expenditure and they were paid for “expenses incurred on all the 8 home and away Black Stars qualifying matches.”

The report strongly encourages this practice to be streamlined or stopped altogether because ‘it has fraudulent implications’.

Who is a ball boy? And was he really paid $100,000?

Don’t be rude. The politically correct title given was ‘equipment officer’. In advanced settings that’d be the kitman.

But in Ghana, we call the Black Stars kitman/equipment officer ‘ball boy’ because the current role of managing the team’s boots, jerseys, travel materials and so on evolved from the traditional role.

Anyway, Ismail Hamidu is the Black Stars equipment officer, and he did get $100,000 as appearance fee. Yep, the same as all the players and technical team members.

Is the equipment officer so important to have earned $100,000?

The simple answer is no.

The detailed reason is as follows:

In advanced jurisdictions, the mandate of the equipment officer comes with strict academic requirements and measurable key performance indicators.

In the Black Stars setup, the GFA’s evidence tended categorized Ismail as a member of the ‘technical team’.

This is surprising because we know from experience that the job of equipment officers in Ghana encompasses lugging suitcases, taking care of player’s apparel, making sure their boots are in good shape and similar duties.

And that is why according to the Dzamefe report (p46) “it is outrageous for the equipment officer (ball boy) for example to be categorized under technical team to receive $100,000 appearance fee.”  

Was it Joseph Langabel who was paid $5,000 for being the team’s official drummer?

It was actually $5,263 but yes, he’s the one.

Did the commission find out how much Ghana spent to qualify for the 2014 World Cup?

Yes. The total cost, from Ghana’s first qualifying match against Lesotho on June 1, 2012, until the team exited the World Cup itself on July 31, 2014 was $11,912,563.

And how much did Fifa pay Ghana for taking part in the World Cup?

Ghana was paid $8m, which was the amount fifa paid each country eliminated at the group stage.  

What’s the rumour that $175,000 was paid to Black Stars players but wasn’t signed for?

Yes. This happened when Ghana beat Egypt over two legs in the last qualifiers to seal their place in the World Cup. The Ministry of Sports say they misplaced the claim sheets that had the players’ signatures for collecting a total of $15,000 each. (Below: players celebrating World Cup qualification in Cairo.) 

Was Yaw Ampofo-Ankrah, the brother of the former sports minister, ever mentioned?

Yes. The report mentions him as being part of the official sports ministry delegation for the Black Stars’ qualifiers to Sudan and Egypt. The report says he took per diems totaling $1,800 for both trips.

However, his name does not appear anywhere during the World Cup proper.  

Why has Hon. Kwadwo Adu Asare been surcharged so much?

The report recommends that the former MP for Adenta be surcharged for $18,250.

Adu Asare was Chairman of the Protocol and Welfare subcommittee of the World Cup project. The story is that when protocol passengers on the state-sponsored trip got to Brazil, Ghana’s High Commission there gave him (Adu Asare) this amount to pay for accommodation and feeding expenses.

But he – together with one Larry Acheampong and the former sports minister – have been unable to provide receipts for how the money was used, according to the report.

-

CLICK HERE TO READ PART 2: Why the commission and the GFA hated each other

-

Gary Al-Smith is assisting editor at #JoySports. Follow him on Twitter: @garyalsmith

DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
Tags:  


DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.