A former MASLOC boss under the NDC government Sedina Tamakloe Attionu has denied allegation of misappropriation against her by the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO).
An audit report making rounds in the media claims Mrs Tamakloe withdrew ¢500,000 of MASLOC cash invested with Obaatampa Microfinance but failed to pay the amount back into the accounts of MASLOC among other offences.
“Mrs Sedina Tamakloe should be held responsible for the refund of the amount of GHS 500,000 with interest in accordance with regulations 61(5) of the Financial Management Act, 2003 (654),” the audit report stated.
It also said an amount of over Gh¢2 million for implementation of sensitization programmes in all regions in 2016 cannot be accounted for. Her lawyers have described the EOCO and auditors claims as defamatory, arguing their client is being persecuted in the media.
“We also expect EOCO to adhere to the age long, tested and proven criminal processes if they are of the view that our client has done anything criminal and not to persecute her in the media,” a statement from her lawyers said.
Below is the full statement:
PRESS RELEASE
PURPORTED AUDIT AND/OR EOCO REPORT WITH DEFAMATORY REMARKS.
We write as Solicitors for and on behalf of Sedina Tamakloe Attionu on the above subject matter.
Our attention has been drawn to publications of a purported audit and or EOCO report on various platforms belonging to the Multimedia Group in relation to embezzlement of funds and or malfeasance during to her tenure as the Chief Executive Officer of MASLOC.
The said publication contains statements that are highly defamatory of our client and calculated to ridicule her person in the eyes of decent thinking people and society as a whole.
It must be observed that sometime last year whilst our client was overseas, an invitation letter from the Economic and Organized Crime Office (EOCO) to her was reported in the media and upon her return she honoured the said invitation with her lawyers.
Various allegations were made against our client. The said allegations were denied by our client and she gave a statement to that effect to the investigative agency (EOCO). It is our belief that EOCO as the investigative body is doing its professional work and within the ambit of the law.
We wish to state that whilst it is the duty of the investigator to do their duty to gather evidence to complete their work, a private auditing firm by name Baffour Awuah & Associates wrote to our client to give them information and also respond to the same issues that our client had responded to at EOCO.
We found the request from the said firm curious and an attempt to elicit information from our client after the fact, unacceptable. Upon our advice, our client declined the said invitation to participate in this private audit process.
The process employed confirmed our suspicion that the said audit firm was being used to do a hatchet job as opposed to the professional work as dictated by ethics and the law governing the profession.
It is our duty to state categorically that there is no truth whatsoever in the purported publication being published in the media, especially by the Multimedia Group. For the avoidance of doubt, our client has denied all allegations leveled against her and we wish to reiterate that our client did not misappropriate any funds of MASLOC during her tenure as Chief Executive Officer.
For Multimedia Group to bandy around the so-called audit report and to create the impression that whatever has been stated in the report is sacrosanct is most unfortunate and regrettable especially when the said media group has set some standard as a credible institution.
We must observe that in as much as the media is to inform the populace, it also has the duty not to defame, destroy the reputation of persons and make malicious comments about persons that allegations have been leveled against since under our laws everybody is presumed innocent until proven guilty by a competent court of law.
We also expect EOCO to adhere to the age long, tested and proven criminal processes if they are of the view that our client has done anything criminal and not to persecute her in the media.
Meanwhile, we have the instructions of our client to commence legal action against all persons and corporate entities publishing these defamatory statements about our client with the sole purpose to destroy her hard earned professional reputation built over her working life of over 25 years.
Be advised accordingly.
VICTOR KWADJOGA ADAWUDU Esq.
