FORMAL PETITION FOR AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION INTO SUSPECTED CORRUPTION, ABUSE OF PUBLIC POWER, POSSIBLE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND ADMINISTRATIVE IRREGULARITIES IN THE ALLOCATION AND MANAGEMENT OF 2026 FIFA WORLD CUP VISA OPPORTUNITIES INVOLVING THE NATIONAL SPORTS AUTHORITY, GHANA TOURISM AUTHORITY AND MINISTRY OF SPORTS AND RECREATION.
I submit this petition pursuant to articles 218(a) and 218(e) of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, read together with section 7(1)(a), (e) and (f) of the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice Act, 1993 (Act 456), which provide the constitutional and statutory framework for the Commission’s functions in relation to complaints concerning injustice, corruption, abuse of power, unfair treatment by public officers and other matters falling within its prescribed mandate.
I respectfully invoke the Commission’s jurisdiction to investigate whether the conduct of the relevant public institutions and their officers in connection with the 2026 FIFA World Cup visa facilitation arrangements involved corruption, abuse of public power, conflicts of interest, administrative irregularities or other conduct contrary to the applicable constitutional, statutory and administrative standards.
Accordingly, I request the Commission to independently examine the relevant institutional decisions, beneficiary-selection procedures, official representations, financial transactions and accountability mechanisms; determine whether any public officer failed to discharge a legal or administrative duty; and make such findings, recommendations, referrals or other determinations as are authorized by the Constitution and applicable law.
I consider the circumstances surrounding these arrangements sufficiently serious to warrant the attention of your Office.
The circumstances outlined in this petition raise important questions about the exercise of public authority, the transparency of beneficiary selection, the accuracy of institutional representations, the handling of payments and the adequacy of the accountability mechanisms maintained by the institutions involved.
I consider these matters deserving of the Commission’s independent attention because public institutions must be able to demonstrate that their decisions are made for proper purposes, that the exercise of discretion is fair and transparent, and that public officers discharge their responsibilities in accordance with the Constitution and applicable law.
My concerns relate principally to the conduct of the National Sports Authority (NSA), the Ghana Tourism Authority (GTA) and the Ministry of Sports and Recreation, together with the involvement of TRIBE Culture Fest, the Ghana Tourism Federation (GHATOF) and other individuals or entities whose participation may be established through investigation.
I respectfully invoke the Commission’s constitutional and statutory mandate, including the relevant provisions of articles 218(a) and 218(e) of the 1992 Constitution and the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice Act, 1993 (Act 456), to request an impartial examination of the matters set out below.
I do not ask the Commission to treat allegations as established findings.
I ask it to investigate the relevant records, require explanations from the appropriate public institutions and determine whether corruption, abuse of power, administrative injustice or other misconduct within its mandate has occurred.
1. THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND THE DUTY OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACCOUNTABILITY
The 2026 FIFA World Cup presented Ghana with an opportunity to promote tourism, support sporting development and strengthen the country’s international profile.
The involvement of public institutions in arrangements connected with such an event should therefore have been accompanied by clear procedures, transparent selection criteria, proper verification of beneficiaries and adequate financial controls.
Where opportunities are allocated through public institutions, the criteria governing selection should be identifiable and defensible.
Where officials certify individuals as employees, volunteers or authorised personnel, the information supplied should be supported by appropriate records.
Where applicants are charged money, the purpose of the charges and the handling of the funds should be capable of verification.
I am concerned that the reported discrepancies surrounding beneficiary lists, the questions raised about the status of persons presented as institutional personnel, the reported collection of payments and the requests for explanations concerning sponsorship proceeds raise legitimate questions about the quality of administrative oversight exercised in this process.
These questions should not be resolved through general assurances or informal explanations alone. They require an examination of the records, the procedures adopted and the conduct of the public officers responsible for the relevant decisions.
I respectfully request that the Commission undertake this examination in the interests of administrative justice, institutional integrity and public confidence.
2. THE NSA–TRIBE ARRANGEMENT AND THE VERIFICATION OF BENEFICIARIES
Documents available to me indicate that the NSA and TRIBE Culture Fest entered into a Memorandum of Understanding dated 2 June 2025, followed by supplementary arrangements dated 19 January 2026.
The supplementary arrangements reportedly specified charges of US$3,000 per person for United States visa facilitation and US$2,000 per person for Canadian visa facilitation.
Subsequent correspondence reportedly included a list of 22 proposed personnel transmitted on 28 January 2026 and a letter dated 18 March 2026 in which the NSA certified four individuals as bona fide NSA staff.
I understand that the United States Embassy’s Fraud Prevention Unit subsequently requested employment letters in connection with its verification process.
Further correspondence dated 28 May 2026 reportedly referred to persons described as NSA volunteers or event coordinators.
A list dated 8 June 2026 reportedly contained 102 names, of whom only 15 could be verified as NSA personnel through the records examined. I consider these discrepancies important from an administrative accountability perspective.
The Commission should establish the criteria used to select and classify the beneficiaries, the records relied upon to verify their status, the officials responsible for approving the relevant lists and the procedures followed before information was transmitted to the diplomatic missions.
It should also establish whether the relevant public officers acted within their authority, exercised reasonable care in verifying the information supplied and complied with the applicable administrative procedures.
Where a public officer makes an official representation concerning an individual’s institutional status, that representation should have a proper factual basis.
The Commission should therefore examine whether the certifications and subsequent lists were supported by reliable records and whether any discrepancies were brought to the attention of the responsible officers.
I recognise that an inability to verify an individual through a particular set of records does not, by itself, establish ineligibility or misconduct.
Nevertheless, the discrepancy between the total number of names submitted and the number reportedly verified warrants an explanation supported by documentary evidence.
3. THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE MINISTRY OF SPORTS AND RECREATION
The Ministry’s reported correspondence dated 28 May 2026 and its involvement in the subsequent beneficiary process raise questions about the extent of its oversight and the procedures used to verify information supplied by the NSA.
I request that the Commission establish what information was available to the Ministry, who authorised the relevant correspondence, whether the Ministry independently verified the status of the individuals concerned and what steps were taken to address any inconsistencies.
The Commission should also determine whether the Ministry maintained appropriate oversight of the process and whether its officers complied with the standards expected of public administrators.
I consider it essential that the respective responsibilities of the Ministry, the NSA and private facilitators be clearly distinguished.
A public institution should not be presumed responsible for every act of a private entity with which it interacts. Equally, a public officer should not be permitted to avoid scrutiny where the officer’s own decisions, representations or approvals may have contributed to an irregular process.
The Commission should therefore examine the role of each institution on the basis of the records and the evidence concerning the conduct of its officers.
THE GTA AND THE TRANSPARENCY OF THE ALLOCATION PROCESS
I am also concerned about the reported allocation of visa opportunities through the Ghana Tourism Authority. Information available to me indicates that the GTA’s Chief Executive Officer, Maame Efua Houadjeto, was associated with the allocation of 400 United States slots and 800 Canadian slots.
The scale of these reported allocations raises important questions about the procedures used to identify beneficiaries, the institutional objectives governing the process, the approvals obtained and the expenditure incurred.
I respectfully request that the Commission examine whether the GTA applied clear and consistent selection criteria, maintained adequate records, properly authorised the allocation of opportunities and ensured that the beneficiaries were selected for legitimate institutional or sectoral purposes.
I further request an examination of the financial arrangements associated with the initiative, including the handling of sponsorship proceeds, the authorisation of expenditure and the adequacy of internal controls.
My concern is reinforced by information that, in July 2026, 14 regional directors of the GTA petitioned the Chief Executive Officer seeking information concerning the allocation of the 400 World Cup slots and the utilisation of sponsorship proceeds.
The fact that senior officers within the same institution reportedly considered it necessary to request formal explanations raises questions about the availability of information, the adequacy of internal accountability mechanisms and the manner in which management responded to concerns about the allocation process.
I do not suggest that the petition by the regional directors establishes wrongdoing.
However, I consider it a relevant document that the Commission should obtain and examine alongside any response from management, the allocation records, financial statements, supporting vouchers and internal audit reports.
The Commission should determine whether the GTA’s administrative procedures were fair, transparent and consistent with the applicable standards governing public institutions.
5. GHATOF AND THE REPORTED COLLECTION OF PAYMENTS
I further request that the Commission investigate the reported arrangements involving the Ghana Tourism Federation.
Information available to me indicates that an allocation initially described as four slots was subsequently expanded to 20.
I have received information that individuals were charged approximately GH¢2,250 each in connection with the expanded allocation.
I have also received allegations that the relevant visa fees were not paid to the Embassy and that the amounts collected were not refunded.
I respectfully request that these allegations be independently verified through receipts, payment records, bank statements, correspondence and statements from the affected applicants.
I understand that the president of GHATOF has raised concerns about the inclusion of persons alleged not to be genuine affiliates or staff of the GTA.
I have also received information concerning a list of 50 individuals, including approximately 30 persons described as members of an Ahwele or Ashawele dancing group, whose identities, affiliations and eligibility require verification.
These matters raise questions about the transparency of the selection process, the accuracy of the information supplied to applicants, the handling of money and the adequacy of the oversight exercised by the relevant public officers.
I request that the Commission establish who selected the beneficiaries, what criteria were applied, who received the payments, whether the promised services were provided and whether the money was properly accounted for.
Where the evidence establishes that an applicant was treated unfairly, that funds were improperly collected or retained, or that public authority was exercised for an improper purpose, I respectfully request that the Commission take the appropriate action within its mandate.
6. POSSIBLE ABUSE OF PUBLIC POWER AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The circumstances described above raise questions that extend beyond the technical administration of visa applications.
They concern the exercise of discretion by public officers, the use of institutional authority, the transparency of decisions affecting access to opportunities and the possibility that public positions or institutional relationships may have been used to confer improper benefits.
I respectfully request that the Commission examine whether:
1. Any public officer exercised authority for an improper purpose or used an official position to secure an improper benefit for themselves or another person.
2. Any officer involved in selecting beneficiaries had an undisclosed personal, financial or other interest in the arrangements.
3. The selection process was governed by clear, consistent and defensible criteria.
4. The relevant institutions maintained adequate records of the decisions taken and the reasons for those decisions.
5. Applicants were given accurate information about the services offered, the fees charged and the handling of their money.
6. Public resources, official correspondence or institutional facilities were used in accordance with the purposes for which they were authorised.
7. The institutions concerned had adequate internal oversight, audit and accountability procedures.
8. Any conduct identified during the investigation warrants referral to another competent authority. I recognise that the existence of an irregularity does not automatically establish corruption or abuse of office.
The Commission should therefore assess the evidence, the applicable legal standards and the conduct of each individual before reaching any conclusion.
My request is for an independent determination of whether the relevant public officers complied with their legal and administrative obligations.
7. THE NEED TO ESTABLISH INDIVIDUAL AND INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
I consider it important that the investigation distinguish between institutional failures and the conduct of particular individuals.
The NSA’s responsibility for identifying and verifying its personnel should be examined separately from the Ministry’s role in its correspondence and oversight.
The GTA’s responsibility for allocating opportunities and accounting for sponsorship proceeds should likewise be examined on its own records. The responsibilities of private facilitators should also be distinguished from those of the public officers who supplied information, approved lists or issued official certifications.
Such distinctions are necessary to ensure that the investigation is fair, accurate and capable of producing meaningful findings.
At the same time, the involvement of multiple institutions should not result in a situation in which each institution attributes responsibility to another while the underlying questions remain unanswered.
I respectfully request that the Commission establish a clear chronology of the decisions taken, identify the officials responsible at each stage and determine whether the relevant institutional procedures were followed.
8. RELIEFS SOUGHT
In view of the foregoing, I respectfully request that the Commission:
a. Register this petition and initiate an independent investigation into the matters raised, within its constitutional and statutory mandate.
b. Obtain the original records relating to the NSA–TRIBE arrangement, including the memoranda of understanding, supplementary agreements, invoices, beneficiary lists, correspondence and employment records.
c. Require the relevant public institutions to explain the basis for their decisions, including the selection, verification and certification of beneficiaries.
d. Investigate the reported discrepancies in the beneficiary lists, including the list of 102 names and the information available concerning the verification of 15 individuals as NSA personnel.
e. Examine the role of the Ministry of Sports and Recreation, including the basis for its reported correspondence dated 28 May 2026 and the oversight exercised over the subsequent process.
f. Investigate the allocation of the GTA’s reported 400 United States and 800 Canadian slots, including the selection criteria, approvals, expenditure and utilisation of sponsorship proceeds.
g. Obtain and examine the July 2026 petition by 14 GTA regional directors, together with any response from management and the records relevant to the concerns raised.
h. Investigate the reported GHATOF payments, including the amounts collected, the payment of visa fees, any refunds due and the selection and verification of beneficiaries.
i. Examine possible abuse of public power, conflicts of interest and administrative injustice, including whether any public officer acted arbitrarily, exercised discretion for an improper purpose or failed to discharge a relevant duty.
j. Determine whether the institutions concerned maintained adequate financial controls, recordkeeping and internal accountability mechanisms.
k. Make appropriate findings and recommendations and, where necessary, recommend corrective measures to prevent a recurrence of the identified problems.
l. Refer evidence of suspected criminal conduct to the appropriate investigative or prosecutorial authority, where warranted and consistent with the law.
m. Inform me of the registration and progress of this petition, subject to the Commission’s lawful confidentiality requirements.
9. THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND THE NEED FOR A CREDIBLE OUTCOME
Public confidence in state institutions depends upon the assurance that public authority is exercised for proper purposes and that decisions affecting access to opportunities are made fairly and transparently.
Where beneficiary lists expand, the institutional status of applicants becomes disputed, substantial payments are reportedly collected and questions arise about the use of sponsorship proceeds, the public is entitled to a clear and evidence-based explanation.
An independent investigation would provide an opportunity to establish the facts, protect the rights of persons whose names have become associated with the allegations and determine whether any individual or institution failed to comply with the applicable standards.
It would also enable the Commission to distinguish administrative error from misconduct and recommend appropriate corrective measures where necessary.
I believe that the issues raised deserve to be addressed through a transparent process capable of producing findings based on evidence rather than speculation or partisan assertion.
10. CONCLUSION
I respectfully submit that the circumstances outlined in this petition warrant the Commission’s independent attention.
The matters concern the exercise of public authority, the allocation of visa opportunities, the accuracy of official representations, the verification of beneficiaries and the handling of money in arrangements associated with the 2026 FIFA World Cup.
I am prepared to provide the relevant documentary records and further information in my possession to assist the Commission in establishing the facts.
I respectfully request a thorough and impartial investigation, followed by such findings, recommendations, corrective measures or referrals as the evidence and the law justify.
I further request that the Commission examine not only the immediate allegations but also the institutional procedures that permitted the reported discrepancies to arise, with a view to identifying any weaknesses in verification, financial accountability and administrative oversight.
The purpose of this petition is to secure an independent determination of the facts and ensure that any proven misconduct is addressed through the appropriate legal and administrative processes.
I trust that the Commission will give this petition the serious consideration it deserves.
Yours Sincerely,
Hon. Vincent Ekow Assafuah Esq
MP, Old Tafo Constituency.
