Table of Contents
Ghana Heavy Equipment Limited (GHEL) is facing serious accountability questions over the sale of public land, the “disposal” of a residential property, unsupported withdrawals and payments, and weaknesses in the management of a GH¢1.4 million office construction project.
The concerns are contained in the 2025 Auditor-General’s report on Public Boards, Corporations and other Statutory Agencies.
At the centre of the findings is the sale of a 0.83-acre parcel of public land in Tamale for GH¢500,000.
According to the report, former GHEL Chief Executive Officer Yaw Ntow-Ababio, acting on behalf of the company, sold Plot No. 22 at Eujung Residential Area Block ‘A’ to Autodream Limited on November 22, 2021.
Former Board Chairman Abass Ridwan Dauda told auditors the Board approved the sale to generate revenue because GHEL’s operations had significantly declined.
But the Auditor-General said the transaction deprived GHEL of future economic benefits and contravened the Lands Act, which prohibits the unlawful sale or conveyance of public land.
The Auditor-General has recommended sanctions against the former CEO and Board members involved.
GH¢1.386m residential property sale
Questions also surround the sale of a GHEL residential property to former CEO Yidana Mahami.
Auditors traced GH¢1,386,460 deposited into GHEL’s Prudential Bank account as proceeds from the sale.
But GHEL could not provide Board approval or other documentary evidence authorising the transaction.
More significantly, auditors said they could not establish the specific selling price of the property.
The absence of an independent valuation, according to the report, raised the possibility that the property could have been sold below its fair market value.
The former CEO was also unavailable to provide his response to the audit query.
The Auditor-General has recommended that the former CEO provide complete documentation for the transaction or that the sale be revoked or rescinded.
GH¢1.345m paid to contractor without proof of work done
GHEL also paid GH¢1,345,934.43 to Niara Limited for the construction of an office complex.
But auditors said the company failed to provide key documents, including bills of quantities and interim payment certificates, to establish whether the money paid corresponded with the actual work executed.
The audit therefore could not confirm whether the payments represented value for money.
The payments included an initial GH¢538,941.08 mobilisation payment.
That payment itself has become another accountability concern.
GH¢326,201 mobilisation overpayment
The Auditor-General found that GHEL paid Niara Limited mobilisation of GH¢538,941.08, representing 38% of the GH¢1,418,266 contract sum.
Under the applicable financial management regulations, advance payments for such contracts should not exceed 15%.
The approved 15% mobilisation was GH¢212,739.90, meaning GHEL paid GH¢326,201.18 more than the permitted amount.
The Auditor-General warned that the overpayment exposed GHEL to the risk of losing funds if the contractor failed to deliver the expected works.
GH¢534,939 commission overpayment
Another major finding involves GH¢534,939.07 allegedly overpaid to Delphi Tech Limited for securing tenants for GHEL’s Kumasi warehouses.
GHEL paid the company total commissions of GH¢576,932.98 for the rental arrangements with Hyundai Ghana Limited and Toyota Ghana Limited.
However, auditors calculated that the maximum commission allowable under the Rent Act was GH¢41,993.91.
The Auditor-General therefore classified GH¢534,939.07 as an overpayment and directed GHEL to recover the money.
GH¢459,000 in payments and withdrawals unsupported
The audit further identified GH¢279,000 in operational payments for which GHEL could not produce receipts, acknowledgements or other supporting documents.
Another GH¢180,000 was withdrawn from the company’s bank account without supporting documentation.
In both cases, auditors said they could not establish whether the money was used for the intended purposes or in the interest of GHEL.
The Auditor-General has recommended recovery of the amounts from the responsible former officials.
Procurement records missing
The accountability concerns extend to the procurement of the GH¢1.4 million office complex.
Although the Public Procurement Authority approved restrictive tendering on the condition that four companies be invited, GHEL could not produce procurement records showing the prequalification process or evaluation that led to Niara Limited winning the contract.
There was also no signed contract detailing the rights and obligations of GHEL and the contractor.
The Auditor-General warned that the absence of these records undermined transparency, fairness and competitiveness and created risks around value for money.
Board Chairman doubled as CEO
The report also raises concerns about corporate governance at GHEL.
Former Board Chairman Abass Ridwan Dauda served concurrently as acting CEO from July 2022 to April 2025.
During that period, auditors found that he signed cheques and contracts and took major executive decisions while remaining Board Chairman.
Mr Dauda explained that he was appointed to act because the substantive CEO, Yaw Ntow-Ababio, was indisposed.
The Auditor-General, however, said the arrangement weakened the separation between governance and executive management and could create conflicts of interest and weaken oversight.
GH¢183,006 tax liability
GHEL also failed to deduct and remit GH¢183,006.47 in withholding taxes from payments totalling more than GH¢3 million.
The Auditor-General said the failure resulted in lost tax revenue to the State and could expose the company to penalties.
The report recommends that the responsible accountant pay the tax from his or her personal account and provide evidence of payment.
Current management points to past leadership
In several of the cases, current GHEL management told auditors it had referred the queries to former management for explanations.
The company said it was awaiting responses from former CEO Yaw Ntow-Ababio and former Board Chairman Abass Ridwan Dauda on the transactions.
The Auditor-General has recommended sanctions, recovery of questionable or unsupported payments and stronger financial and governance controls.
The findings raise broader questions about how a state-owned company managed public assets, procurement, payments and internal controls during the period under review.
Source: Bolgafmonline.com| 102.7 MHz| 2025 Auditor-General’s report
