Lawyer in private practice and Counsel to the former President of the Republic, Kow Abaka Essuman Esq. has, in a post in his X handle, revealed that he has in a letter addressed to the Executive Secretary of the Right to Information (RTI) Commission, Ms. Genevieve Shirley Lartey, Esq., pointed out that the Commission has allowed itself to be misled by the management of the Minerals Income Investment Fund (MIIF).
*90-Day Grant to MIIF*
The RTI Commission, in a letter dated 16 January 2026 and addressed to Mr. Kow Essuman, granted MIIF and its CEO a 90-day window to comply with an RTI request submitted by Mr. Essuman, a former board member of the fund, demanding a copy of MIIF’s 2024 audited financial statements.
“The Commission has received a response from the Minerals Income Investment Fund (MIIF) in respect of your application for information. In its submission, MIIF requested a deferral of access to the requested information on the grounds that its Board has identified material misstatements in the 2024 financial statements, which were not detected during the initial audit process.
“MIF further indicated and provided the Commission with evidence that it is presently under formal engagement with the Auditor-General for the purpose of undertaking a further review of both the initially signed and completed 2024 audit report, as well as the identified misstatements arising therefrom,” RTI Commission letter to Mr. Essuman read.
“Considering the foregoing, and pursuant to section 22 of the Right to Information Act, 2019 (Act 989), the Commission has granted MIIF a period of ninety (90) days within which to complete the necessary review processes and provide the requested information accordingly,” the RTI Commission letter further read.
*Misleading of RTI Commission*
In a letter dated 26 February 2026, Mr. Essuman observed that the RTI Commission was misled by the MIIF CEO regarding an application for review he submitted to the commission on an RTI request he submitted to MIIF, which MIIF management failed to attend to.
The commission, according to Mr. Essuman, went ahead to take a decision on his application for review as a result of the misrepresentation by the MIIF CEO without the commission carrying out any due diligence.
“Even after I brought this to the attention of the Commission, it regrettably declined to reconsider its position and instead proceeded to justly and entrench it. This is particularly concerning in light of the Commission’s statutory mandate to conduct independent inquiries and investigations.
“It is evident from the circumstances and correspondence from the Audit-General, which was procured after the Commission’s letter of 30 January 2026, that no independent verification was undertaken and that the Commission relied solely on representations made by MIIF. This approach is inconsistent with both the letter and spirit of the RTL Act,” Mr. Essuman stated in his letter.
“For instance, your letter indicates that MIIF raised concerns about misstatements in the earlier audit and requested a review and restatement of the 2024 audited financial statements.
“However, had the Commission undertaken even minimal independent verification, such as writing to the Auditor General, it would have discovered that although MIIF had indeed made such a request, the Auditor General refused to review and restate the 2024 audited financial statement,” the letter further read.
*2025 audit of MIIF*
Mr. Essuman, in his letter, also posited that the RTI Commission was misled by the MIIF CEO about which entity would audit MIIF’s 2025 financial statements.
He pointed out that, had the commission done its due diligence, it would have discovered that the Auditor-General had terminated the contract with the external entity to carry out the 2025 audit of MIIF and had since decided that the audit service would carry out the 2025 audit of MIIF.
“Similarly, your letter further states that the Auditor-General commissioned an external auditor to audit MIF’s accounts for the period 1 January to 31 December 2025.
“Respectfully, this information is wholly irrelevant to my application for review, which concerns the 2024 audited financial statements,” Essman’s letter read.
“More importantly, had the Commission engaged the Auditor-General, it would have discovered that the appointment has since been terminated, and the Audit Service itself is conducting the 2025 audit.
“Upon receipt of your letter, I wrote to the Auditor-General to verify the matters. The responses received confirm that the Commission did not independently verify the information presented by MIIF and was, regrettably, misled,” the letter further read.
*Resistance to RTI Request*
In concluding his X post, Kow Essuman noted, “There is a bigger question that must be asked. Why was a simple request for information met with resistance at every stage? Why was a completed audit challenged? Why was the Auditor-General reported to the Presidency?
“Why was an external auditor brought in and then removed? Why did the RTI Commission not verify a critical claim? And most importantly, what was so important in those 2024 audited financial statements that it triggered all this?
“When a citizen must fight for five months to obtain information that already exists… when institutions designed to ensure transparency become obstacles… when truth must struggle to survive within public systems… then we must pause.
“Because the issue is no longer about MIIF. It is no longer about an audit. It is about whether the rule of law still governs our public institutions. And whether truth still has a place in public administration. Ghanaians must ask questions. Because silence, in moments like this, is not neutrality. It is permission,” the X post by Kow Essuman Read.
