Concerns are being raised over the real intentions behind the former Minster for Science and Technology, Professor Kwabena Frimpong Boateng allegations against Information Minister Kojo Oppong Nkrumah in the fight against illegal mining in the country.
In a 37-page report authored by Prof. Frimpong Boateng to the Chief of Staff, he accused Mr. Oppong Nkrumah of plotting to bring him down over the fight against illegal mining.
“On Saturday the 8th of February 2020, Mr. Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, the Minister for information assembled a group of journalists from both NDC and NPP affiliated media houses at the Forest Hotel in Dodowa to discuss a strategy to bring me Kwabena Frimpong-Boateng down,” Prof. Frimpong-Boateng alleged in his report.
He further alleged that the meeting had occasioned numerous negative media reportage against his work as Chairman of the now-dissolved Inter-Ministerial Committee on Illegal Mining (IMCIM).
But Mr. Oppong Nkrumah vehemently rejected the allegations describing them as completely false adding that despite being utterly disappointed by the claims he forgives the former minister.
“Over the years, I had nothing but great admiration for Professor Frimpong-Boateng’s public-spirited works and as an inspirational citizen. I feel gravely offended over the false claims he has made and the hurtful conclusions he has sought to exact about me precisely because of the great esteem in which I have held him.
“I trust that in the coming months and years, he will reflect deeply upon his own actions and comments which have led to his challenges. He should kindly leave me out of his personal fights. I am utterly disappointed but I forgive him.”
According to Oppong Nkrumah, the meeting Prof. Frimpong-Boateng referenced was a Private Newspaper Publishers Association of Ghana (PRINPAG) event, jointly organized with the Bank of Ghana on financial reporting which he attended.
In rebuttal, Prof. Frimpong-Boateng shifted his stance providing no proof to the allegations he raised earlier raising concerns about the credibility of the report and whether or not it was a move to deliberately impugn the reputation of his former colleagues who did not agree with his approach to fighting the galamsey menace.
