Former Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA) Chief Executive Kwasi Agyeman Busia has challenged his successor, Julius Neequaye Kotey, to provide evidence to support claims that he renegotiated a roadworthiness sticker arrangement from US$51.8 million annually to GH¢2 million over three years.
Mr Busia, in a rejoinder dated Tuesday, September 22, 2026, described Mr Kotey’s account as “wrong and materially misleading”, arguing that the two amounts do not represent comparable contractual obligations.
Mr Kotey reportedly made the claims during an interview with Starr FM host Nathan Kwabena Adisi, popularly known as Bola Ray.
According to Mr Busia, the GH¢2 million is understood to cover equipment and consumables, including computers, printers and toners, rather than the actual design, production and supply of roadworthiness stickers.
He further alleged that the current administration had entered into, or obtained approval for, a separate sticker-supply arrangement valued at approximately GH¢118 million.
He has therefore called on Mr Kotey to clarify whether the GH¢2 million covers the stickers themselves or constitutes a separate expenditure under the programme.
Mr Busia also wants the current DVLA leadership to disclose the total quantity of stickers to be supplied, the unit price, the total approved value of the principal supply arrangement and whether the same supplier continues to provide the stickers under a separate framework or call-off arrangement.
“If the GH¢2 million relates only to computers, printers, toners and associated equipment, then it was not a negotiated replacement for the alleged US$51.8 million annual SLA. It was a separate and additional cost,” he stated.
Busia questions claimed savings
The former DVLA chief executive argued that the GH¢2 million cannot be presented as savings without a comprehensive assessment of the costs associated with the roadworthiness sticker programme.
He said a proper calculation must account for sticker production and supply, the electronic issuance and management system, software licensing and hosting, technical support, maintenance, equipment, consumables, taxes and other statutory charges.
Mr Busia maintained that only a like-for-like comparison of the previous and current arrangements could establish whether the State had achieved genuine savings.
He also questioned the basis of Mr Kotey’s claim, noting that the current chief executive had admitted during the interview that the previous administration did not make payments under the alleged US$51.8 million annual Service Level Agreement (SLA).
Mr Busia argued that an amount that was never paid could not automatically be described as savings.
He challenged Mr Kotey to publish the original executed agreement, evidence that the alleged amount constituted a legally enforceable payment obligation, and any subsequent amendment, variation, novation or replacement agreement.
He also requested evidence that the supplier had formally released the DVLA from the alleged liability, alongside documentation showing that the same contractual obligations had been reduced to GH¢2 million.
Without these documents, Mr Busia said, the claim of reducing US$51.8 million to GH¢2 million remained unsupported.
Calls for disclosure of procurement arrangements
Mr Busia further called for clarity on what the US$51.8 million figure represented, arguing that an SLA is not necessarily equivalent to the total contract price or the amount actually paid by an institution.
He said the figure could represent an approved procurement ceiling, estimated annual requirement, contract price, maximum framework value, guaranteed payment obligation, invoiced amount or actual expenditure.
According to him, these categories are not interchangeable, particularly where procurement is conducted under a framework arrangement that allows purchases through individual call-off contracts.
He urged the DVLA chief executive to publish the applications submitted to the Public Procurement Authority and the corresponding approvals, including any specific application and approval covering the GH¢2 million.
Mr Busia also called for disclosure of the complete scope and value of the current arrangement, all associated costs and the methodology used to calculate the claimed savings.
He said independent verification should establish whether any costs had been transferred to another contract, budget line, service provider or future agreement.
Busia defends previous administration’s record
The former chief executive also defended his administration’s role in developing the electronic roadworthiness sticker system, arguing that the current management had inherited an established technological infrastructure.
He said the DVLA previously operated a largely paper-based roadworthiness certification system with limited security features, traceability and electronic verification capabilities.
According to Mr Busia, his administration progressively transformed the system into a technology-enabled regulatory credential through investments in secure sticker design, electronic issuance and management, anti-counterfeiting features, unique identification, system integration and verification mechanisms.
He said the transformation also required servers, supporting infrastructure, equipment for DVLA offices, technical support and maintenance, as well as the operational capacity needed for nationwide implementation.
Mr Busia maintained that the current administration was benefiting from a system that had already been designed, financed, deployed and operationalised.
He argued that the cost of developing and deploying a national security system should not be compared directly with the subsequent cost of maintaining selected components.
He consequently called for disclosure of whether software licensing, hosting, technical support or system upgrades had been waived, deferred, transferred or reserved for future agreements.
Busia criticises Kotey’s remarks
Mr Busia also criticised what he described as insulting language used by Mr Kotey in referring to his predecessors, saying such remarks were inconsistent with the standards expected of a public institution’s chief executive.
He argued that concerns about potentially unlawful, inflated or harmful contracts should be addressed through audits, preservation of evidence and referrals to the appropriate authorities rather than personal attacks.
Mr Busia said he welcomed lawful initiatives aimed at improving efficiency, strengthening road safety and delivering value for money but insisted that claims of public savings must be supported by verifiable records.
He called on Mr Kotey to clarify whether the GH¢2 million represented the total cost of the national roadworthiness sticker arrangement or an additional expenditure on equipment and consumables.
If it covered only equipment and consumables, Mr Busia urged the current DVLA chief executive to withdraw the claim that he had reduced the alleged US$51.8 million annual SLA to GH¢2 million and correct the public record.
“The public deserves the total cost – not a selected line item,” he stated.
