Oliver Barker-Vormawor Issues Apology for Bribery Claim

Oliver Barker-Vormawor Apologizes for Bribery Allegation Against Parliamentary Appointments Committee

Well-known social activist Oliver Barker-Vormawor apologised formally to the Parliamentary Appointments Committee after claiming on social media that ministerial appointees had to accept payments in order to be approved. His remarks, he added, were not meant to cast the 11-member committee in a negative light or to suggest that its members had committed dishonest acts.

On January 24, 2025, Barker-Vormawor posted on Facebook and X (formerly Twitter), stating:

_“So all the monies the ministerial appointees are being asked to pay to the Appointments Committee just to get approved, are those ones not affected by ORAL? Strange Republic.”_

However, he denied authorship of another post that was reportedly sourced from the NPP Project Bureau and published on Ghana Today. Barker-Vormawor labeled this post as “fake” and distanced himself from it.

Following his online remarks, Bernard Ahiafor, the Chairman of the Appointments Committee, summoned Barker-Vormawor to appear before the committee and provide evidence to substantiate his claims. This summons was prompted by the Minority Whip, Frank Annoh-Dompreh, who expressed concern over the potential damage such statements could cause to the reputation of Parliament. During the vetting of the Minister-designate for Defence, Dr. Edward Omane Boamah, Annoh-Dompreh insisted that Barker-Vormawor be invited to explain his comments.

Appearing before the Appointments Committee alongside his legal counsel, Nana Ato Dadzie, Barker-Vormawor clarified that his statement was not intended to tarnish the committee’s image. He expressed regret for any misunderstanding caused and issued a public apology.

_“Mr. Chair, at no point was my statement intended to disparage the committee. For those reasons, I apologize.”_

He further explained why he had not deleted the post despite the controversy it generated:

_“The reason why I left the post online and did not delete it—though I considered doing so—was because I noticed that my words had been twisted. It became necessary for me to keep the original post accessible to allow reference and verification if needed.”_

Barker-Vormawor’s legal representative, Nana Ato Dadzie, defended his client by stating that the post was made in good faith under the Whistleblower Act. He emphasized that Barker-Vormawor’s intent was to shed light on alleged misconduct in governance and not to malign the Appointments Committee.

_“If in the process of highlighting societal wrongs, there is an assumption that he made an error, he is sincerely ready to apologize,”_ Dadzie stated.

Furthermore, he explained that the post was not specifically directed at the committee but aimed at broader concerns regarding transparency in government appointments.

Following his apology, the Chairman of the Committee asked Barker-Vormawor if he would now delete the post, given that the matter had been clarified. Barker-Vormawor responded positively:

_“Mr. Chair, as the discussion has provided clarity, I am happy to take it down.”_

The Ranking Member of the Committee, Alexander Afenyo-Markin, advised Barker-Vormawor to issue a formal disclaimer to reinforce his clarification. He recommended that copies of the disclaimer be shared on all platforms where the original post was made and submitted to the committee.

This incident underscores the impact of social media commentary on governance and parliamentary affairs. While Barker-Vormawor’s apology helps mend relations, it also serves as a cautionary example of the responsibility that comes with public statements, particularly those concerning high-ranking government bodies.

RECOMMENDED ARTICLES