RTI Commission summons Finance Minister over Article 71 ex-gratia
22nd January 2026
The Right to Information (RTI) Commission has formally stepped into the growing controversy surrounding Ex-Gratia payments for Article 71 office holders, demanding explanations from the Office of the President and the Ministry of Finance over their failure to respond to a formal information request.
The intervention follows weeks of silence from both institutions over inquiries into payments due to officials who served under the Akufo-Addo administration between 2021 and 2025.
In two separate but identical letters dated 15 January 2026, the RTI Commission directed the Office of the President and the Minister for Finance, Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson, to provide written responses to an RTI request submitted by journalist Wilberforce Asare.
The letters, signed by the Executive Secretary of the Commission, Genevieve Shirley Lartey, were copied to the complainant and assigned case numbers RTIC/AFR/94/2025 (Office of the President) and RTIC/AFR/93/2025 (Ministry of Finance).
The journalist’s original application, filed on 7 October 2025, sought clarity on the status of the determination and payment of Article 71 emoluments—popularly referred to as Ex-Gratia—for senior public officials who served during the second term of former President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo.
These officials include former ministers, members of the Council of State, and other constitutionally designated office holders whose benefits are charged on the Consolidated Fund.
Interestingly, the immediate past Members of Parliament including the Finance Minister Ato Forson had been paid their ex-gratia by the current administration.
Under the Right to Information Act, 2019 (Act 989), public institutions are required to determine and communicate a decision on an RTI request within 14 days of receipt.
However, nearly two months after the request was filed, neither the Presidency nor the Ministry of Finance had provided a response.
The applicant subsequently filed applications for internal review on 24 October 2025, as provided for under Section 32 of the Act, but again received no reply.
By early December 2025, with both the original request and the internal review unanswered, the applicant petitioned the RTI Commission under Section 65 of Act 989, arguing that the silence of the two institutions amounted to a “deemed refusal” under the law.
He contended that the failure of the Presidency and the Ministry of Finance to act constituted a breach of their statutory obligations and violated Article 21(1)(f) of the 1992 Constitution, which guarantees the right to information.
Responding to the complaint, the RTI Commission invoked its investigative powers under Sections 43(2)(b) and 70 of Act 989, reminding the two institutions of their legal duty to assist the Commission in any ongoing review or investigation.
The Commission directed both the Office of the President and the Ministry of Finance to submit written reasons for their non-response and to provide the requested information within seven days of receiving the letters.
The Commission further warned that failure to comply within the stipulated timeframe could result in the matter being determined based solely on the information already available to it.
It also cautioned all parties involved to refrain from making public statements that could prejudice the ongoing investigation until a final decision is reached.
In his application, the complainant is seeking far-reaching remedies, including orders compelling the Chief of Staff and the Minister for Finance to disclose the requested information, declarations that both institutions breached multiple provisions of the RTI Act, and the imposition of administrative penalties under Section 71 of Act 989 for what he describes as willful and unjustifiable disregard of the law.
He is also asking the Commission to issue a time-bound directive requiring full disclosure within seven days of its ruling.