Silencing The Press, Not Answering Questions
Thomas Oppong Peprah’s lawyers demand retraction and apology; but what is he so desperate to hide?
General Thomas Oppong Peprah has fought many battles in his military career. But his latest campaign is being waged not on the battlefield but in the corridors of legal power.
The former Chief of Defence Staff, now Ghana’s Deputy High Commissioner to Canada, has dispatched his lawyers to demand that The New Republic retract and apologise for its investigative reporting on his staggering personal wealth. The letter from Cardinal Law Group, signed by Oheneba Adusi-Poku, Esq., gives this newspaper 24 hours to remove all “offensive and defamatory publications”.
But here is the question the General refuses to answer: If he has nothing to hide, why is he so desperate to hide the story?
Just days ago, General Oppong Peprah was singing a very different tune.
In a combative telephone interview with The New Republic, the General boasted about his wealth, insisting he was “simply born into money”. He pointed to his lineage as the sole explanation for a property portfolio that includes 23 houses across Ghana, the UK, Dubai and the United States.
“Let me let you know this; number one, I was born to a rich father,” he declared. “The fact is that I’m a made-up person myself. I don’t need to go to anybody to beg for money”.
He spoke at length about his father’s transport company, Tommy Brothers Transport, insisting he inherited a fortune. He boasted about his achievements in the military. He challenged anyone with evidence of wrongdoing to come forward.
Now, having said his piece having given this newspaper an earful about how “monied” he is he wants it all to disappear.
The General’s legal offensive targets reporting that laid bare the extraordinary scale of his wealth:
A $1.3 million mansion in Airport Hills, purchased in cash while he served as CDS, with an additional $1 million spent on renovations. The paper trail exposes a convoluted proxy transaction that circumvented the banking system.
Properties in Cantonments, East Legon, and the upscale Mayfair Estate in Tse-Addo – including two four-bedroom houses, one gifted to his wife Agnes.
A £750,000 holiday home in the UK purchased for his mistress Ann.
Properties in Dubai, paid for in cash through a proxy, reportedly intended to secure a UAE residence permit.
His wife’s separate portfolio: three properties in Ohio, USA, including a $1.4 million home.
A fleet of luxury vehicles: a dark sand-coloured Range Rover, a navy-blue bullet-proof Lexus, Toyota truck, Kia Van, Toyota Estate, and an S-Class Mercedes-Benz.
And then there is the matter of a property at the African Union village purchased for Anne Boateng, his mistress, where she resides with their two sons Thomas and Guy.
THE QUESTION THAT WON’T GO AWAY
Under Ghana’s asset declaration law, public officials including the Chief of Defence Staff are required to declare their assets to the Auditor General. The General’s current appointment as Deputy High Commissioner also triggers similar obligations.
The New Republic has established that none of these properties were ever declared.
The General’s response? Silence followed by lawyers.
A PATTERN OF DOUBLE GAME
This is not the first time General Oppong Peprah has sought to have it both ways.
In a telephone conversation with this newspaper, he acknowledged that an investigative board was constituted to probe the controversial procurement of armoured personnel carriers for the Ghana Armed Forces. He confirmed that he and others had submitted statements, and that President John Dramani Mahama had been briefed.
Yet in public, through proxies and official military statements, he denied any probe exists. His allies rushed to Daily Guide to issue a categorical denial, followed by an official Ghana Armed Forces statement declaring the story “false and groundless”.
So who is lying the former CDS or the institution he once commanded?
THE PROCUREMENT SCANDAL HE CAN’T ESCAPE
Beyond the property empire lies the substance of the APC procurement scandal: the acquisition of 20 BTR-70 armoured personnel carriers at a cost of US$8.8 million.
Investigators have reportedly established that although procurement documents claimed the vehicles were manufactured in 2002, they were in fact built in 1972. Production of the BTR-70 ceased in 1984, making a 2002 date impossible. Chassis records were allegedly altered to deceive.
The APCs arrived in Ghana in deteriorated condition rusted bodies, torn upholstery, missing radiators and hoses. The primary 14.5mm KPVT heavy machine guns were absent; only secondary 7.62mm PKM coaxial guns were delivered. Many of the vehicles remain unserviceable, lying idle at the Recce Regiment in Burma Camp.
General Oppong Peprah deflects responsibility, insisting the procurement was initiated under his predecessor. But the investigation which he himself confirmed continues to examine whether misleading documentation was presented to then-President Nana Akufo-Addo.
THE PRICE OF SILENCE
The Cardinal Law Group letter demands that The New Republic give “prominence to your retraction and apology in equal measure as you did to the aforesaid defamatory comments”.
We will give the General’s legal threats the prominence they deserve right here, alongside the questions he refuses to answer:
· If you inherited such wealth, why did you never declare it?
· If you are innocent, why are you trying to silence the press rather than answering the questions?
· If the APC procurement was above board, why did you admit to the investigation in private but deny it in public?
· How does a transport business reduced to three ramshackle buses before your father’s passing explain 23 houses across four continents?
The General told this newspaper he is a “made-up person” who doesn’t need to beg for money. He said he used his influence to build up the military. He challenged anyone with evidence to come forward.
We came forward. We published the evidence. And now he wants to bury it.
General Oppong Peprah’s legal letter speaks of “elementary civility” and being “sensitive to the sensibilities of the reputation of others”.
We would remind the General that journalism is not about civility to power it is about accountability. It is about asking the questions that the powerful would rather not answer. It is about shining a light where others would prefer darkness.
The General gave The New Republic an interview. He spoke at length about his wealth, his father, his achievements. He cannot now claim defamation for words that came from his own mouth.
If he wants to clear his name, the door is open. The questions remain. The public deserves answers.
And no letter from any lawyer will change that.
