You are here: HomeNews2001 08 09Article 17240

General News of Thursday, 9 August 2001

Source: The Independent

Government Advisor's Bluff is Called

The editor of the Weekly Insight, Kwesi Pratt Jnr. on Tuesday took a swipe at Dr. Charles Wereko-Brobby, the Government Advisor on Energy and called his bluff.

Mr. Pratt Jnr. was reacting to the stand-off between the Ghana Journalists Association(GJA) and Dr. Wereko- Brobby who has repeatedly maintained that he owes no apology to Ghanaian Journalists in his infamous "journalists take money in "Wiase Ye Sum" polythene bags" statement.

Listen to Pratt: "Dr. Brobby has been bluffing for far too long" and added that the current intransigence by the Energy Advisor only shows that his long bluffing has been exposed.

According to Mr. Pratt, Wereko-Brobby cannot hide under his adopted defence to cover up for the fact that he cannot substantiate the allegation that he knows some journalists who are induced by politicians.

He challenged Dr. Brobby to mention those names and not hide under the cloak of his spurious defence. .

Although Mr. Pratt agreed that like any profession, Journalists might have their shortfalls, the fact that seminars and workshops are organised for media personnel means the profession can only get better.

After refusing to accede to the GJA's demand to apologise to Ghanaian journalists based on recommendations of the ethics committee, Dr. Wereko Brobby made a dramatic U-turn the day after and promised to co-operate with the GJA.

According to the Energy Advisor, he was prepared to assist fully with a properly constituted investigation committee to be set up by the GJA.

In a statement, Dr. Brobby said he informed the Ethics Committee that investigated his allegation of his willingness to substantiate the incidents within the context of a wider and more comprehensive investigation by the GJA on the issue; and indicated that two specific incidents which he mentioned could provide a credible basis for his comments.

According to him, given the delicate nature of the two incidents, he preferred to arrange for the Chairman of the Ethics Committee to have a confidential discussion with one of the key players in the matter.

He was of the opinion that since the GJA President had already pronounced him guilty publicly, the committee's deliberation seemed pointless.