Don’t rush to judge Doctors named in Charles Amissah probe – Okoe Boye

Former Minister of Health, Bernard Okoe Boye, has called for caution in the public handling of findings from the investigative report into the death of engineer Charles Amissah, warning against drawing definitive conclusions before fully reviewing the document.

Speaking in an interview with Selorm Adonoo on What the Papers are Saying on Thursday, May 7, Dr Okoe Boye questioned the practice of making categorical public pronouncements about individuals based on excerpts from a report that has not yet been comprehensively studied.

He stressed the need for a measured and fair approach in discussing the findings, particularly given the sensitivity of the matter and its potential implications for the individuals involved.

“You should have an issue when you have a committee that is speaking to the whole country making categorical statements for individuals when we’ve not read the report to see the comments they made,” he said.

He argued that in other jurisdictions, full reports are released with detailed context and transcribed evidence to allow readers to better understand the basis of findings before conclusions are drawn.

Okoe Boye said he views the committee’s work as a preliminary or prima facie assessment rather than a final judgment on the individuals involved.

“I give them credit but I take their work as a prima facie establishment where on the surface of it these guys are wrong,” he stated.

“That is why they are directing to specific agencies. I don’t believe that those they have directed to, GMA, will just say you’ve been directed here, you’ve been punished, go,” he added, suggesting that due process would still be followed.

His comments come amid concerns raised by the Ghana Medical Association over the handling of the report and the public naming of medical professionals implicated in the case.

The Association has warned that identifying doctors in the findings has exposed them to public hostility, online attacks, and personal safety risks, arguing that disciplinary processes should be handled in a way that protects professionals while ensuring accountability.

Leave a Reply