Jinapor demands answers as Alima Mahama is asked to pay for Embassy spending outside her tenure

The opposition's parliamentarian, Samuel A. Jinapor, has raised concerns over the Ghanaian Foreign Affairs Minister's demand for former Ambassador to the United States, Alima Mahama, to reimburse funds linked to embassy expenditures during her tenure. Jinapor stated that the demand seems to cover costs from a time period outside Mahama's official role.

He supported accountability and the return of public money but emphasized that the procedure followed by the minister must adhere to proper protocol. The inquiry emerged from a Special Audit Report by the Auditor-General, which examined the Ghana Embassy in Washington between January 2017 and June 2025. The audit was prompted by allegations of financial and operational irregularities at the mission.

Consequently, the Foreign Affairs Minister sent a letter to Alima Mahama requesting a refund of the purportedly audit-related expenses. However, the opposition party disputes the minister's methods. They argue that the Constitution only empowers the Auditor-General with the authority to disallow and surcharge audit findings. Consequently, they questioned the minister's legal basis for the demand and noted that the affected individual has 60 days to either pay or appeal in court.

Jinapor also highlighted Mahama's claim that she was never given the chance to respond to the audit findings. The parliamentarian cited Mahama as saying, "The auditors neither spoke to me nor wrote to me to respond to any issue/observation." The opposition stressed the need for due process, including providing her with a hearing before any decisions.

Additionally, they questioned why the refund request covers activities from 2019 to 2025, a period when Mahama was not in office. The statement pointed out that no audit report suggested the amounts were only relevant during Mahama's tenure. They also noted that the Special Audit Report had not been presented to Parliament prior to this statement, which is a requirement under Section 16 of the Audit Service Act.

The opposition accused the government of moving forward prematurely and publicly accusing Mahama before legal proceedings were concluded. They maintained that while they would back lawful efforts to recover public funds, they insisted that such actions must comply with the law.