Dr John Apea, a respected figure at the Commonwealth’s human rights office, recently made waves by questioning the narrative around William Ato Essien—the founder of the now-defunct Capital Bank. According to Dr Apea, the controversial GH¢90 million wasn’t stolen—it was a loan, and Essien was wrongly painted as a thief.
What Dr Apea Is Saying
- He challenged the story that Essien misappropriated GH¢90 million. Instead, he says that figure refers to liquidity support disbursed by the Bank of Ghana—a loan the bank repaid diligently.
- Essien earned a finder’s fee of GH¢27.5 million, a standard arrangement for facilitating such loans—not illicit income. The bank continued paying monthly dues of GH¢14.4 million without default, even repaying over GH¢308 million before being closed.
- Dr Apea also points to a strange irony: the Managing Director of Capital Bank, who approved the fee payment, was acquitted, yet Essien was convicted for simply receiving it. How does that make sense? he asked.
Why This Matters
- Justice & fairness: Dr Apea calls Essien a scapegoat, emphasizing the need for a more humane approach to justice—especially due to Essien’s declining health.
- He isn’t contesting legal outcomes, but argues the public story is misleading—and wants people to separate finder’s fee from theft.
Key Case Background
- Essien pleaded guilty in late 2022 to stealing over GH¢192 million of liquidity support. He agreed to repay GH¢90 million—some of which was paid by 2023. The court structured it as a restitution deal under Ghana’s Courts Act.
- He was sentenced to 15 years in prison in October 2023 after defaulting on payments. As of that ruling, only GH¢37 million had been paid.
The Contrast in Verdicts
Despite the MD being cleared, Essien was convicted for receiving a fee. Dr Apea questions this disparity—calling it inconsistent, unfair, and symptomatic of misleading public discourse.
What Dr Apea Wants
- He is leading a petition requesting presidential clemency, focusing on principles of justice, mercy, and Essien’s health.
- He frames the appeal not as forgiveness for mismanagement, but as compassion for a man he believes was made the face of a system failure, not its architect.
Conclusion
Dr John Apea is pushing back: the GH¢90 million wasn’t stolen, and Ato Essien wasn’t a rogue banker—but rather a pivotal figure caught in a broader collapse. If Essien paid back most of the loan and health is declining, Dr Apea argues it’s time for mercy and reconsideration. The conversation now shifts: who really lost—and who really pays?