The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration, Hon. Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa has revealed startling new details about a multi-million-dollar corruption scheme that operated within Ghana’s Washington D.C. Mission, implicating more than just a “lone wolf” at the lower ranks of the diplomatic post.
In his update to Parliament, the Minister outlined a scheme allegedly spearheaded by Mr. Fred Kwarteng, a locally recruited staffer, who exploited a lack of digital integration and oversight to operate an unauthorized visa and passport dispatch and support business through a company known as GTC.
The revelations come as part of the broader institutional reform efforts undertaken after the temporary closure of the Mission due to irregularities and public dissatisfaction with service delivery.
Unmasking the Digital Loophole
According to the Minister, efforts to standardize the websites of Ghanaian Missions under a contract with EMH Global—initiated in 2020 and renewed in 2024—were rebuffed by the Washington Mission. This failure to synchronize web platforms allowed GTC to embed links that redirected applicants from the official embassy portal to GTC’s private website, where they were charged extra fees for services.
“Had this integration been implemented, this illicit redirection would have been curtailed,” the Minister stated, emphasizing that the attempt to dismiss the scandal as the work of a single rogue actor was untenable.
A Business of Exploitation
Following the COVID-19 pandemic, the Mission moved to a fully online system for visa and passport processing, with delivery handled via courier services managed by Fred Kwarteng. Under this setup, GTC charged each applicant an additional $29.75 for mailing services and between $60 to $100 for assistance in filling out forms. Startlingly, 99% of all applicants used GTC’s services.
On average, GTC dispatched around 250 visas/passports daily—amounting to roughly 62,500 annually. This translated into about $1.86 million a year from courier fees alone. Including form-filling assistance, Fred Kwarteng is estimated to have generated over $4.8 million annually through this unauthorized operation.
“There was no record of any of these funds being remitted to the Ministry,” the Minister emphasized. “This is nothing short of exploitation of desperate applicants and a blatant abuse of public trust.”
Calls for Prosecution and Wider Investigations
The Ministry has since invited the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) and the Attorney General to trace the proceeds of this scheme and prosecute those involved. “This directive was issued by the President, and we have acted on it without delay,” he noted.
The Minister also revealed that the Auditor-General had flagged irregularities at the Embassy as far back as two years ago. These included procurement anomalies and broader financial mismanagement that were either ignored or insufficiently addressed.
Network of Complicity
The investigation further revealed that GTC was initially co-owned by Fred Kwarteng and his ex-wife—raising serious concerns about conflict of interest. Admissions from current and former Embassy staff, along with Fred Kwarteng’s own statements, confirm he did not act alone.
“There appears to be a network of individuals who facilitated or benefited from this operation,” the Minister stated, adding that the complexity and scale of the operation suggest an organized system of collusion rather than isolated misconduct.
A Wake-Up Call for Diplomatic Reform
The scandal has triggered an urgent rethink of how Ghana’s diplomatic missions operate, especially regarding financial accountability, transparency, and digital integration.
The Minister affirmed that these revelations only strengthen the government’s resolve to ensure thorough reform across all Missions. “We must reflect deeply on how a system was created to enrich one man at the perceived bottom of the hierarchy,” he remarked. “But clearly, he had help.”
The full report from the Internal Investigative Committee is expected soon, alongside potential prosecutions and further administrative action.
Source: Clement Akoloh
Comments