The National Organiser of the opposition New Patriotic Party (NPP), Henry Nana Boakye, says he will take legal action against The Fourth Estate over its report alleging the existence of ghost names in National Service postings.
According to Nana Boakye, The Fourth Estate’s investigative piece was misleading and based on a flawed methodology.
Speaking on JoyFM Top Story on Wednesday, February 19, he argued that the media organisation inaccurately subtracted figures published by the National Service Scheme (NSS) from those presented to Parliament, leading to erroneous conclusions about alleged ghost names.
“We do a summation of all of these figures, we present it to Parliament, so for them to have extracted a figure from Parliament, and then again, to have relied only on the National Service postings publications we make for the July, August postings, is disingenuous, it’s recklessness.”
The controversy stems from The Fourth Estate’s claim that in 2018, the NSS published a total of 85,000 postings, while Parliament was presented with a figure of 135,000.
The difference of 50,000 was then flagged as ghost names, an assertion Nana Boakye vehemently disputed.
Read also: Mahama orders probe into ghost names corruption scandal at National Service Authority
He explained that beyond the initial university student postings, additional groups, including teacher trainees and nursing students, are posted at different times of the year, which accounts for the higher figure submitted to Parliament.
He further contended that National Service postings are publicly documented through press releases, making it easy to verify numbers.
“Anytime we post nurses, it is online, we make it public. Anytime we post teachers, we make it public so you can easily verify.
“It is disingenuous to say that they went to Parliament, they picked the figure from there and then they relied on only one figure,” he said.
Nana Boakye also pointed out that the NSS registration system has been a target for scammers who attempt to infiltrate it using fraudulent credentials.
However, he stated that biometric verification at regional and district levels prevents such individuals from benefiting from the scheme.
“For Fourth Estate, for me, frankly, I am going to take them on because you see, you do not put people’s reputation on the line like that,” he stated.
“I listen to Sulemana Braimah making a categorical statement that because they have got gotten a figure from Parliament, they subtracted from the main one and then those are ghosts. They multiply by National Service allowance and they say that those monies are found in the pocket of people.
“I am going to sue them. You are saying that you did not get access to GIPS (Ghana Interbank Payment and Settlement Limited) data. I didn’t hear that portion coming out. I didn’t hear Sulemana saying that the only point where we can say that those people were paid would be at GIPS. But unfortunately, we do not get access to GIPS so we cannot confirm that they were paid.”
Responding to Nana Boakye’s comments, the Programmes Manager for the Independent Journalism Project at the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA), Kwaku Krobea Asante, stated that they are fully prepared to address any legal challenge he may bring against them.
“He admitting on record that indeed they have some names that are not supposed to be on that system is actually admitting to complicity,” he asserted.
Read also: Nana B sues to halt annulment of public service appointments made after Dec. 7
Meanwhile, the NPP National Organiser has filed a lawsuit challenging the unlawful termination of appointments for individuals employed both before and after December 7, 2025.
Nana Boakye argued that the directive is unconstitutional and exceeds the authority of the Chief of Staff, who issued the order on February 10, 2025.
Mr Boakye contended that the directive violates Article 191(b) of the 1992 Constitution, which protects public service employees from dismissal without just cause.
He maintains that neither the Chief of Staff nor the President has the power to arbitrarily revoke legally sanctioned appointments.
