IMANI Centre for Policy and Education has responded to the National Identification Authority, NIA, a statement on a social media post by Bright Simons, an Honorary Vice President of the policy think tank.
According to IMANI, the purported response from Abudu Abdul-Ganiyu, who is the Ag. Head Corporate Affairs, NIA, does not deny the facts contained in the Simons’ post.
Simons, on August 12, tweeted, “how many are even aware that until recently, the Ghana Card brand design itself was not even owned by Ghana? It was owned by a French company & the country had to pay to get it. When Civil Society scrutinises your govt, be grateful. There’s a war for the soul of your country.”
This triggered a response from Dr Abudu Abdul-Ganiyu, Ag. Head, Corporate Affairs, who in a statement dated August 17, 2022, said, “the post should be regarded as a mix of half-truth, insinuation, self-praise and alarmism.”
The release available to GhanaWeb, further pointed out that “the controversy over the Ghana Card artwork, generated by the said post, is wholly needless and distractive.”
The Authority added that it is wrong and ignorant on the part of Bright Simons “to suggest that the historic retention of the artwork (brand design) by a French company has any significance.
“NIA welcomes well-considered comments derived from full-fledged and proper scrutiny that advances good governance, transparency and/or accountability.”
In a 6-paged reply, IMANI said it looks as if the Bright Simons’ tweet only provided a premise for Professor Ken Agyeman Attafuah to launch an attack he must have been relishing for a while on their Vice President.
The statement indicated that NIA in their information never denied the content of Bright Simons‘s tweet.
“It confirmed these facts and then proceeded to add a padding of completely self-serving commentary that did nothing more than reconfirming the suspicions of crass incompetence that have dogged the NIA for years, especially in Professor Attafuah’s tenure,” the statement dated August 17 read.
In examining the layers added by the NIA to Simon’s tweet, IMANI’s statement said, “Ghana signed a contract with a French company to roll out Ghana Card services in 2008. Ghana paid the company for these services. At all material moments, this company was a contractor working for Ghana.
“Yet until 2017, the company was holding on to the design rights of the Ghana Card and only released it after Ghana paid good money for what should have been hers from day one. The specific amount has never been disclosed in any Ghanaian audit. Our enquiries suggest that it was hefty.
“Let us repeat for emphasis: for more than five years after Ghana had passed various measures, and eventually a law in 2012, forcing every act of citizenship in Ghana to be expressible only through the Ghana Card, the design rights of this vaunted instrument were actually in the hands of a foreign company. If it had no claim to it, we wouldn’t have had to pay money to secure the rights. The fact that we had to pay them off means it could have refused our terms and held us hostage. We should all allow that to sink in slowly.
“We understand that Professor Attafuah is a trained lawyer. Unlike him and his colleagues at NIA, we understand basic courtesy. So, we won’t presume to teach him a basic contract and intellectual property law in the same manner that he designed to teach our colleague policy analysis. But we will point out a few critical matters for the sake of the general public,” the statement added.
