Zoomlion justifies payment of GH¢184m by State

Zoomlion Ghana Limited yesterday, told the Accra High Court that payment of more than GH¢184 million to the company by the state was based on work done per a fumigation contract and not obtained by fraud.

The company said it was paid the said amount of money upon the execution of the contract spanning 2007-2018.

But, the Auditor-General, in its 2015 report made adverse findings against Zoomlion, and issued a surcharge against the company.  

The Auditor-General averred that there was no contract between the government and Zoomlion after the expiration of the fumigation contract in 2013.

The waste management company subsequently filed an appeal against the findings of the Auditor-General at the High Court on December 5, 2018.

Zoomlion argued that both the company and the Ministry of Health maintained their contractual relationship after the expiration of the Nationwide Mosquito Control Programme contract.

Counsel for Zoomlion, Osafo Buabeng, told the court presided by Justice Mrs Georgina Datsa that Zoomlion continued to work and the Ministry of Health acting through the National Health Insurance Authority (NHIA) verified the work and made payment.

In arguing whether Zoomlion had a contract, Mr Buabeng said per a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Social Security Bank vs CBAM Services Inc. (Supreme Court of Ghana Law Report SCGLR-2007-2008 at page 894), the contract between his client and the state was in force. 

He said that the respondent erred in its findings that the appellant had between the year 2017 and 2018 been paid a total amount of GH¢184,901,650.00 devoid of due process without affording the appellant the opportunity to respond to the allegations made against him.

However, the respondent discounted the claim, and said it served the appellants’ company with a notice of intention to disallow an amount of GH¢184,901,650.00 against it in accordance with the principle of natural justice.

The respondent  averred that the monthly reports presented to it by the appellant did not include the years 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 and that the basis upon which payments were made for the period 2009-2012 were unclear.

It is the case of the respondent that the evaluation report of the nationwide Mosquito Control Programme confirmed that the programme was for a period of four years spanning 2009-2013, and had since not been renewed.

The respondent said it acted within the powers conferred to it by the 1992 Constitution, and urged the court to confirm the instant disallowance and dismiss the appeal as it is frivolous, vexatious and unmeritorious.


Show More
Back to top button