In a song popular during the economic difficulties of the late 1970s and early 1980s, the down-and-out asked for a pesewa.  Years later, inflation raised the pitch on city streets to one Ghana cedi.   Homelessness became a publicly recognized problem.  At the Ministry of Works and Housing and Urban Development (MWHUD), some political appointees, career professionals, contractors, and consultants upped the ante even higher.

The 10^th Parliament of the Republic grappled with a huge problem the Donkor Administration had inherited:  fraud, embezzlement, favouritism, lack of documentation and accountability, and other abuses in MWHUD that had gone undetected for years.  Attorney General Jones Amponsah Bediako announced on June 15, 1983 that all MWHUD local offices across the country would be investigated.  At a hearing the next day before the Employment and ousing Suibcommitee of the CHHHH
Housing Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations of Parliament, Chairman James Okudjato characterized this step as a “very dramatic, almost unprecedented action.”

At the same hearing, MWHUD’s inspector general, Paul A. Derry, listed over two dozen MWHUD employees who already had been charged with various offences. Then there was Mary Anderson, former settlement agent under contract to MWHUD and dubbed “Robin HUD” by the media.  She admitted to theft of more than GhË500 million in MWHUD funds, which she claimed to have used to help the homeless and poor.  Her explanation? At the June 16, 1983, Parliamentary hearing, she said the following:

I, in no way, justify what I have done as being anything less than sin.  I have come forward, as one who loves the Lord, in an attempt to confess to the world that I am a sinner, and I am sorry that I diverted government funds.  I am prepared to give everything that I have or will ever have to restore to the government that which was taken … Gentlemen, it was through love and compassion that I diverted the money and tried to help others. I did not keep any for myself …
 
Suffice it to say, I humbly apologise for becoming part of a scandal and diverting funds without the authority to do so.   I justified my actions inwardly only by reminding myself that I followed a higher law in an attempt to ease suffering.  My only explanation lies in John 15:12-14. … [In regard to a GhË37 million shortfall in her escrow account] I felt that the government isn’t personal, if you’ll forgive me for saying so, that if I have to hurt someone because of an error, I would prefer that it would be the government rather than a private individual.

At this point, Chairman Okudjato said, “Well, you know it was poor judgment on your part, of course you do.” Anderson responded, “Yes. Of either of the choices.   I was in trouble either way.  At least this way someone wasn’t in trouble with me.”

According to the Constitution, “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law.” What Anderson did was illegal.

“Government employees are about as likely as private citizens to belong to fundamentalist churches, to attend church weekly, to consider themselves ‘strong’ members of their religions, and to pray daily” (Lewis, 1990, p. 223).

In your view, is it ethical for a public employee or contractor to use public office or funds to answer to an authority higher than the 4^th Republican Constitution of Ghana?

At the October 12, 1983, hearing before the Parliamentary Subcommittee on Housing and Community Development, Minister Jack Ewusi Kramppah said, “She (Anderson) was no Robin HUD.  She was not stealing from the rich and helping the poor.  She was stealing from the rich to enrich herself.  So, she should not be considered a Robin HUD.”

The part played by greedy and misguided individuals was compounded by mismanagement.  For over three years, from July 1979 through September 1982, no one at MWHUD noticed anything about Anderson’s accounts.  The public record (from parliamentary hearings) reads: “shockingly lax and inept management”.  “MWHUD lost and lost track of millions of cedis”, “MWHUD did not have a system in place to monitor these payments”, “getting control of the money flow was ignored.” Corruption and mismanagement often walk together, hand-in-hand.

Henry Issakah Adams, chairman of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Development, stated at a hearing on October 12, 1983: “As I look at the so-called scandals that have been revealed at MWHUD, it is my view that we have seen a people’s problem and not so much a programme problem.  What we have had in the last 8 years at MWHUD are ambitious and rather self-seeking people who betrayed public trust.  I make the distinction between scandalous mismanagement and the integrity of the MWHUD programmes.  Let me be clear.  These programmes work when people of goodwill are there to administer them.  There is no way we can pass laws to make people good or to make administrators honest and efficient.”
 
Former congressional colleagues praised Minister Jack Ewusi Kramppah throughout the 1983 hearings for decisively facing up to the problems that preceded him at MWHUD and for taking responsibility for the clean-up and overhaul.  At the October 12 hearing, Krampah unveiled a full-scale reform of departmental procedures.  The blueprint, “Clearing the Decks,” called for ethics, management and finance, and National Housing Administration overhaul.  Compliance-oriented proposals included the following: sunshine all funding decisions, eliminate discretionary funding, require registration of consultants and disclosure of fees, mandate documented accountability for regulatory waivers, and increase the powers of the auditor general.

Required 
 
1.  In your opinion and assuming that all the diverted funds were donated to charitable purposes, was what Anderson did ethically justified?  The right thing to do?  Why or why not?
 
2(a).   Is it ethical for a public official or employee to use public office and resources to pursue a personal agenda, however laudable?
(b).     Is a private contractor such as Anderson also bound by your answer?
(c).      Does your answer change if that agenda is based on basic religious beliefs?  Family loyalties? Policy preferences?  As you answer, think about the possibility that high public officials’ personal religious convictions contradict your religious beliefs.  Consider that they have the power and made the promise of legal compliance.
 
3.  What would happen if everyone acted as Anderson did?  What would be the consequences for public policy?  For public trust?  For a government under law?
 
4(a). Is the ethical offence—theft—defined by the use of the resources?  
(b).   Does it matter whether personal gain or charity was the purpose?  Why or why not?
(c).   Is it ethical to use immoral means to accomplish moral ends? Why or why not? 
 
5.  Do you agree with Henry I Adams’ assessment? Explain.  In your view, what contributed to MWHUD’s problems: individual greed, careless recruitment, lax oversight, and/or weak management and controls?  How?

6. What will you recommend to Minister Jack Ewusi Kramppah to attend to integrity issues in the agency?