GIZ and EU Team Up to Combat Corruption With New Forensic Lab and Digital Interview Centers
By Ernest Bako WUBONTO
In an effort to bolster Ghana’s anti-corruption measures, the German Development Agency (GIZ) along with the European Union (EU) have provided funding to set up a forensic lab and audiovisual interview facilities aimed at aiding probes into financial offenses.
Astrid Kohl, who serves as the Programme Director for Participation, Accountability and Integrity for a Resilient Democracy (PAIReD) at GIZ Ghana, disclosed that this project is part of the PAIReD program funded jointly by GIZ Ghana and co-financed by the European Union.
This significant investment in digital infrastructure aims to empower the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), Office of Special Prosecutor (OSP), and other law enforcement agencies to function electronically. It will facilitate proficient online or visual investigations along with ensuring precise outcomes through forensic analyses.
She mentioned that a portion of the €12.7 million allocated for the PAIReD program will be used to purchase sophisticated forensic tools and set up high-tech interview spaces aimed at supporting proficient, tech-assisted investigation processes.
The project also encompasses the digitization of 30 Circuit Courts across the country through the implementation of digital case management systems. This step aims to reduce human intervention, speed up corruption cases, and enhance transparency.
"The initial segment of this program is a project jointly funded by the GIZ and EU aimed at helping the OSP and EOCO establish an advanced forensics laboratory and a digitally-focused audiovisual interview facility," she stated.
She added, "The third aspect of the digitalization initiative aims to support the establishment of 30 digital Circuit Courts. Thus, we will collaborate with 30 Circuit Courts nationwide to implement digital case management systems, which will help minimize the role of humans in handling corruption cases."
As the OSP’s ongoing investigations have uncovered that certain ex-government officials currently under scrutiny are abroad and won’t return within the next three to six months, access to this kind of digital infrastructure might enable remote interviews to collect the necessary data.
Joseph Whittal, who serves as Commissioner at the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), pointed out that funding anti-corruption agencies in the nation has consistently posed challenges. Therefore, he emphasized that the timely assistance provided by the PAIReD program—particularly through equipping these organizations with digital infrastructure and enhancing their workforce’s capabilities—is crucial and will significantly aid efforts to prevent the misuse of public funds for private benefit.
He emphasized several necessary legal changes in combating corruption, including the establishment of a Code of Conduct for public officials. He called upon the government to make the passing of the Conduct of Public Officials bill a priority.
"Strengthening the capabilities of those combating corruption is crucial, and we at the CHRAJ view this assistance as a positive step toward our efforts against corruption. It’s essential to develop expertise in the necessary legal changes needed to tackle corruption—such as codes of conduct for public officials and laws protecting witnesses—to safeguard citizens and ensure accountability from government employees," he stated.
Public officials' codes of conduct usually outline values, principles, and benchmarks for ethically appropriate behavior and actions. These guidelines serve as crucial foundations for establishing strong governance practices and are employed to fight corruption, boost public trust, ensure transparency, and uphold integrity within governmental organizations.
According to Article 284 in Chapter 24 of the 1992 Constitution, "A public official must ensure they do not find themselves in a situation where their private interests clash or have the potential to clash with carrying out their duties."
A 'conflict of interest' pertains to a scenario wherein a public servant's personal interests clash with—or have the potential to clash with—their duties as an officer. This issue is closely linked to adhering to the requirements set forth in the Declaration of Assets and Liabilities outlined in Article 286(1) of both the Constitution and the Public Office Holders (Declaration of Assets and Disqualification) Act from 1998 (Act 550).
Provided by Syndigate Media Inc. ( Syndigate.info ).