By Issah Olegor
A fresh accountability controversy has emerged within the public sector governance framework following a petition to President John Dramani Mahama demanding disciplinary action against the Board Chairman of Ghana Gas Company Limited, Gerald Kofi Totobi Quakyi, over his failure to comply with constitutional asset declaration requirements.
The petition follows a formal decision by the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), which found that the board chair breached the law by failing to declare his assets within the constitutionally mandated timeframe.
The petition, dated 18 February 2026 and addressed to the President at Jubilee House, was filed by Ghanaian citizen Wilberforce Asare, who drew presidential attention to CHRAJ’s ruling delivered on 13 February 2026.
The CHRAJ decision concluded that Totobi Quakyi failed to declare his assets and liabilities within six months of assuming public office, as required under Article 286 of the 1992 Constitution and reinforced by the Public Office Holders (Declaration of Assets and Disqualification) Act, 1998 (Act 550).
According to the Commission’s findings, Totobi Quakyi’s asset declaration was submitted two months outside the statutory deadline.
CHRAJ further rejected the justification offered for the delay, describing the explanation as “unreasonable.”
While acknowledging that the Ghana Gas Board Chair eventually complied after a complaint was filed, the Commission held that the delay constituted a clear breach of constitutional and statutory obligations governing public office holders.
In its ruling, CHRAJ stated that the circumstances ordinarily warranted punitive sanctions but opted for a reprimand, citing the absence of “inordinate delay” and the fact that the declaration was made promptly after the matter was formally brought to the respondent’s attention.
The Commission, however, strongly cautioned Totobi Quakyi to strictly comply with future asset declaration timelines and obligations to avoid any recurrence of similar violations.
Beyond the reprimand, the case has now escalated into a broader governance and accountability debate.
In his petition to the President, Wilberforce Asare argued that a mere reprimand does not reflect the gravity of the breach, especially in light of President Mahama’s own publicly stated governance standards.
He referenced the President’s May 2025 launch of the Code of Conduct for Political Appointees, where the President declared that any appointee who failed to declare assets by 7 May 2025 would face automatic dismissal, a directive widely seen at the time as a major anti-corruption and transparency milestone of the administration.
Asare contended that allowing the Ghana Gas Board Chair to remain in office without stronger sanctions undermines that policy position and weakens public confidence in the enforcement of accountability standards.
He further cited Article 297(a) of the Constitution, which grants the appointing authority the power not only to appoint but also to discipline and remove political appointees from office.
According to the petition, Totobi Quakyi serves at the pleasure of the President and is therefore subject to direct presidential disciplinary authority.
The petition formally calls on President Mahama to enforce the CHRAJ decision by issuing the recommended reprimand and to consider additional disciplinary action, including possible removal from office, in line with the administration’s declared policy on asset declaration compliance.
Asare stressed that consistent and impartial enforcement of the law is essential to maintaining public trust in the governance institutions, particularly when constitutional bodies such as CHRAJ have made clear findings of non-compliance.
The CHRAJ ruling itself arose from a broader accountability action initiated by Wilberforce Asare, who had earlier filed a mandamus application at the High Court seeking to compel CHRAJ to investigate asset declaration compliance among several public officials, including heads of state institutions and board chairs of state corporations.
The Ghana Gas case, officially numbered CHRAJ/HQ/2704/2025, forms part of that wider civic accountability effort.
In delivering its decision, CHRAJ commended Asare for “discharging his civic duty by helping to hold public officers accountable,” while also acknowledging the cooperation of the respondent during the investigation process.
