BOST saga: Group files suit against BOST, NPA and oil companies

BOST saga: Group files suit against BOST, NPA and oil companies

- A group has sued BOST, NPA and others over the recent scandal involving the sale of contaminated fuel

- They have accused the BOST MD of approving the sale without legal authority

- They want the High Court to declare the transaction 'null and void', along with other reliefs brings you the latest news in Ghana

A public interest advocacy group, Strategic Thinkers Network-Africa has filed a suit at the Accra High Court over the sale of contaminated fuel to energy companies.

BOST, NPA, Others sued by group
Alfred Obeng Boateng, BOST MD

READ ALSO: Court discharges 13 of Major Mahama's killers

The suit is regarding the transaction between the Bulk Oil Storage and Transport Ltd and some oil companies, that have been revealed to be unlicensed including Movenpiina Energy and Zup Oil.

Cited in the suit are BOST, the Managing Director of BOST, Alfred Obeng Boateng; the National Petroleum Agency (NPA), Movenpiina Energy, Zup Oil and Macwest.

The group in their suit, claimed BOST proceeded with the transaction without properly investigating the background of the oil companies involved in the sale.

They have accused the BOST director, Mr. Obeng Boateng on acting on behalf of the institution without the legal authority to approve the transaction with Movenpiina Energy, especially since the company had no appropriate documentation from the NPA to transact business as an oil company.

The Plaintiff (Strategic Thinkers Network-Africa) further stated that Movenpiina subsequently sold to Macwest, two million litres at GHC 1.32 per litre for GHC 2,640,000.

With Movenpiina making a profit from GHC 640,000 after buying the oil at GHC 1 per litre, their transaction caused financial loss to the state.

PAY ATTENTION: Get all the latest news on the go with the app right here

According to a report, the suit filed by the counsel for the group, Godwin Kudzo Tameklo, following the revelation of the information regarding the sale, stated that the transaction was "illegal, fraudulent, and with potential to cause financial loss to the state."

They are therefore, seeking a number of reliefs from the organizations in question, including A declaration that the transaction for the disposal of the contaminated fuel from the 1st Defendant acting through the 2nd Defendant to the 3rd and 4th Defendants is illegal, unlawful and in clear violation of Section 16(2)(c) of the Page | 6 Public Procurement Act, 2003(Act 663) as amended by the Public Procurement (Amendment) Act, 2016 (Act 914).

2. A declaration that the decision to single source the sale of the contaminated fuel products to the 4th Defendant by the 2nd Defendant acting through the 3rd Defendant is in clear contravention of Section 35 and 40(1) of Public Procurement Act, 2003, (Act 663) as amended by the Public Procurement (Amendment) Act, 2016 (Act 914).

3. A declaration that the activities of the 4th and 5th Defendants in engaging in downstream petroleum activities without licenses is in violation of Section 11 of the National Petroleum Authority Act, 2005 (Act 691).

They also seek an order from the court declaring the entire transaction as illegal and fraudulent.

The group further demanded relief for costs, including legal representation costs, as well as any other reliefs that the High Court would feel is appropriate regarding the case.

READ ALSO: You don't qualify to be my 'house-boy'- Asamoah Gyan jabs Countryman Songo

Want to be featured on Send us an email at or visit our Facebook page.

Source: Yen

Online view pixel