Galamsey Economy: Three Unsettling Questions About Charles Adu Boahen’s ‘Exposé’ That Do Not Add Up | Features



Tiger Eye PI, the Ghanaian investigative agency run by Anas Aremeyaw Anas, launched its current exposé, galamsey financial system, headlined by a clandestine assembly with the now-former Minister of State on the Finance Ministry, Charles Adu Boahen.

The assembly, held in a lodge room in Dubai, was between a Sheik, ostensibly seeking to put money into Ghana, and Charles Adu Boahen, then Deputy Finance Minister and till lately, a Minister of State.

The subject was supposed investments into Ghana, and the dialogue ended with Adu Boahen being given a money reward for purchasing by the ‘Sheik’.

The complete documentary by Tiger Eye PI containing the assembly was aired on Monday, 14th November 2022 on the Accra Worldwide Convention Centre, preceded by an article in Abdul Malik Kweku Baako’s New Crusading Information.

It kicked off a firestorm–Adu Boahen was rapidly painted within the worst gentle potential, sacrificed expeditiously by his personal authorities for alleged corruption and battle of curiosity.

And but, simply because it’s removed from clear that the money Boahen obtained was a bribe and never a present, there are additional inquiries to be raised over the Tiger Eye PI documentary and its previous newspaper article.

A cautious research of the 2 results in some disturbing questions that want answering.

1. Who else was on the assembly and why had been they edited out?

A daily characteristic of Tiger Eye PI documentaries – all documentaries in general- is that they characteristic well timed cuts and edits, normally to inform no matter story the producer needs to inform.

It’s an unavoidable characteristic of the medium that opens it as much as manipulation – that means a skillful and biased producer can accomplish so much with the correct cuts and edits.

Typically, what’s neglected of a chunk of movie is simply as necessary as what seems in it.

The assembly with Tiger Eye PI that supposedly implicates Adu Boahen is actually one which deserves greater than a better look.

It’s being solidly stated that there was another person with Adu-Boahen at that assembly however solely he, Adu Boahen, appeared on digicam.

Who was the opposite particular person and why was he edited out? It might sound innocuous however in such a fragile matter, nothing is.

Each motion and inaction taken by the investigators had a motive, therefore it bears questioning on the very least why was this particular person edited out.

It makes you surprise if they’re different folks they’re making an attempt to guard. These are all questions that have to be answered as a result of it suggests there’s greater than meets the attention that Tiger Eye PI needs to maintain hidden.

2. Why discrepancies exist between Crusading Information article and the video

As talked about earlier, the saga began with the discharge of a New Crusading Information article, adopted up by the premiere of the documentary that very same Monday night time.

But, discrepancies exist between the tales informed by the newspaper and the video, which additional lends credence to the manipulated video principle.

The newspaper informed a cleaner story, gave quotes that flowed, adopted a sample, and tied all the pieces in a neat bow, but rigorously analyzing the video exhibits a far murkier story.

Because of the motives of the investigative workforce, who rigorously went in with a goal and orchestrated all the pieces in direction of that goal, there are numerous cases within the video the place the ‘investor’ steers the dialog in a sure route to elicit a sure response, which was then introduced within the article as if Adu Boahen supplied them up unprompted.

Watching the video tells a special story, as Boahen typically was responding to intentionally laid out cues from the Tiger Eye PI workforce.

It’s a distinction value noting, because the article laid out the quotes in a damning trend with no context whereas the video supplies the necessary context of a entice being rigorously laid by bad-faith actors.

The discrepancies may need had an necessary political impact too, with Adu Boahen summarily sacked inside hours of the article, means earlier than the video was aired which could have proven mitigating elements.

It stands to motive to then surprise why occasions transpired that means and to question who stands to achieve from the ensuing chaos and his exit.

3. Why was Vice-President-Bawumia’s half distorted?

Ghana’s Vice President, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia was apparently implicated within the exposé primarily based on occasions within the preliminary write-up, as soon as once more earlier than the airing of the video.

The article painted the impression that Adu Boahen had stated Bawumia has a (customary) look payment, $200,000, which he expenses buyers earlier than availing himself of their presence.

“Based on Charles Adu Boahen, the Vice President wants an look payment of solely USD 200,000 for him to avail himself and supply his help to an investor,” the New Crusading Information wrote.

But, watching the video, it’s clear Adu Boahen didn’t point out any financial facet when requested concerning the Vice President, solely that he could be excited to fulfill buyers, notably these within the monetary sector, which is his life’s work.

Nevertheless, as soon as once more, the investigative workforce particularly requested what quantity they should put together for the Vice President, suggesting an ‘look’ payment which Adu Boahen went on to oblige regardless of making it clear that Bawumia ‘isn’t like that’.

The pertinent query to be requested here’s what was the target of strongly suggesting a bribe for the Vice President? Why was it acknowledged as a matter-of-fact within the article that the Veep needs an look payment for conferences when no such factor crossed Adu Boahen’s thoughts till being positioned on the spot to make up a determine to fulfill this apparently corrupt Sheik?

At this level, it turns into clear the target of the assembly was a pure setup, designed to entrap the Minister by any means potential.

This isn’t the primary time and wouldn’t be the final time that questions could be requested concerning the strategies concerned in such ‘entrapments’.

Going into an ‘investigation’ with a conclusion already drawn after which doing all the pieces to achieve that conclusion, is hardly an investigation however a prosecution.

It reeks of Herod, saying primarily earlier than acquiescing to crucifying Jesus that he is aware of the person earlier than him isn’t responsible however for the reason that complete world says he’s, who’s he to say in any other case?

We have to be cautious in crucifying Adu Boahen, these unanswered questions surrounding this exposé.

In science and correct work, an investigator have to be unbiased and comply with the proof wherever it might lead – what occurred right here was an investigator deciding the topic is responsible, then designing the proper experiment to achieve that conclusion it doesn’t matter what.

Supply: Edith Osei Bonsu



Disclaimer: Opinions expressed listed here are these of the writers and don’t replicate these of accepts no duty authorized or in any other case for his or her accuracy of content material. Please report any inappropriate content material to us, and we are going to consider it as a matter of precedence.

Featured Video



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here