Why I Left the GJA: Defending Investigative Journalism Amid Ghana Journalists Association Controversy

Published: November 3, 2024 | Explore the reasons behind leaving the Ghana Journalists Association (GJA), from exposing multimillion-dollar fraud to recent criticisms of accountability reporting on contracts like KGL-NLA.

Introduction

In 2017, a pivotal decision reshaped my career in Ghanaian journalism: I resigned from the Ghana Journalists Association (GJA), the premier body representing media professionals in the country. This move stemmed from the association’s response to my investigative report that uncovered a $74 million fraudulent contract awarded to the Jospong Group. Far from supporting accountability journalism, the GJA leadership publicly criticized the story, prioritizing a local company’s interests over public interest reporting.

This incident highlights broader tensions in investigative journalism in Ghana, where exposing corruption often invites backlash from industry bodies. My story not only led to the contract’s cancellation but also won the Best Investigative Story at the 2018 West Africa Media Excellence Awards (WAMECA). Yet, the GJA’s stance echoed recently in their handling of The Fourth Estate’s exposé on the KGL-NLA contract, raising questions about corporate influence in media awards and associations.

This article breaks down the events, analyzes patterns of GJA controversy, and offers insights into safeguarding press freedom and ethical journalism in Ghana.

Analysis

The core issue revolves around the GJA’s apparent reluctance to champion rigorous accountability journalism Ghana when it implicates powerful local entities. Let’s dissect the key cases.

The Jospong Group Contract Scandal

My 2017 investigation revealed irregularities in a $74 million contract given to the Jospong Group, a prominent Ghanaian waste management firm also known as Zoomlion. The report detailed how the deal misused public funds, prompting its swift cancellation by authorities. Despite its impact and subsequent recognition at WAMECA 2018 as the best story in West Africa, the GJA President issued a press statement condemning it.

Notably, the statement failed to identify factual errors. Instead, it argued against “destroying” Ghanaian companies in the name of investigative journalism, framing accountability as anti-nationalist. This response undermined the very principles the GJA claims to uphold: truth-seeking and public service.

The Recent KGL-NLA Contract Exposé

History repeated last month when The Fourth Estate published findings on a controversial contract between KGL Group and the National Lotteries Authority (NLA). The deal allegedly diverted substantial revenues from the state-owned NLA to the private firm, leaving the authority with minimal returns.

At the GJA’s awards announcement—branded this year as the GJA/KGL Awards due to sponsorship—KGL Executive Chairman Alex Apau Dadey used the platform to critique the report. He lamented a “tendency to undermine our own” Ghanaian champions, contrasting suspicion toward local firms with acclaim for foreign ones. No substantive rebuttal to The Fourth Estate’s facts was provided, mirroring the Jospong case.

This pattern suggests a risk of corporate capture in journalism bodies, where sponsorships blur lines between honoring excellence and protecting implicated businesses.

Summary

In summary, my departure from the GJA in 2017 followed their attack on a award-winning exposé of the Jospong Group’s $74 million fraud, which was canceled post-publication. Paralleling this, the GJA recently enabled criticism of The Fourth Estate’s KGL-NLA reporting via their sponsored awards event. These episodes illustrate how GJA awards criticism can stifle investigative work, promoting a narrative that equates corruption exposure with harming local enterprises. True journalism demands separating company nationality from accountability for public funds.

Key Points

Practical Advice

For journalists navigating GJA controversy or similar pressures, consider these evidence-based strategies rooted in global best practices:

Building Ironclad Investigations

Verify sources multiply: Use Freedom of Information laws, official documents, and cross-checks. My Jospong report relied on procurement records, leading to undeniable outcomes.

Engaging Associations Ethically

Document interactions with bodies like GJA. If criticized, demand specifics on errors and publish responses. Promote internal reforms via membership votes or public advocacy.

Leveraging Awards and Networks

Target independent recognitions like WAMECA or the U.S.-based IPI awards. Join alternatives such as the Ghana Investigative Journalists Association for support.

Digital Amplification

Share via platforms like XING or LinkedIn, tagging watchdogs like CHRI Ghana, to counter narratives and build public backing.

Points of Caution

Corporate Capture Risks: Sponsorships like KGL’s can compromise neutrality. Monitor award naming (e.g., GJA/KGL) and speaker platforms.

False Narratives: Claims that accountability “destroys” Ghanaian firms incite public distrust in media, labeling journalists as “enemies.” Counter with facts: Legitimate firms thrive with media support.

Overnight Entities: Beware firms allying with politicians for dubious public contracts. Exposure protects state interests, not targets nationality.

Personal Safety: In Ghana, investigative reporters face threats; align with safety networks like the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA).

Comparison

Comparing the Jospong and KGL cases reveals striking parallels in investigative journalism Ghana challenges:

Both prioritize company defense over evidence, eroding trust in journalism bodies.

Legal Implications

In Ghana, the 1992 Constitution (Articles 162-164) guarantees press freedom and expression, shielding investigative journalism from undue interference. Critics like GJA or companies have legal recourse:

Right to Rejoinder

Under the National Media Commission guidelines, outlets must publish responses to alleged inaccuracies promptly.

Defamation Laws

Criminal defamation was repealed in 2001 (Criminal Code Amendment Act), shifting to civil suits. Companies like Jospong or KGL can sue for libel but must prove falsity—absent in these cases.

Procurement Regulations

Public Procurement Act 2003 mandates transparency; exposures aid enforcement without legal backlash on reporters.

Associations risk reputational harm by siding against members, potentially violating fiduciary duties to promote ethical standards.

Conclusion

Leaving the GJA was a principled stand for accountability journalism Ghana, refusing to let association politics silence corruption exposés. From the Jospong $74 million scandal to KGL-NLA issues, the pattern is clear: Journalism bodies must resist corporate sway, honor evidence-based reporting, and foster environments where public interest trumps private gain. Ghana’s media landscape benefits when associations like GJA prioritize integrity, ensuring investigative work thrives to hold power accountable. Journalists, unite for reform—our democracy depends on it.

FAQ