Public office in Ghana today is not what it was 10 years ago.
Today, a confidential memo is no longer confidential. An internal comment can become a headline. A routine approval can turn into a viral voice note, a panel discussion, and a petition to a statutory body — all before lunch.
This is the new reality. Every note you initial, every “Seen / Approved” you append, every directive you give to your finance team or procurement unit can – and often will – find its way to social media without context, without explanation, and without regard for institutional process.
And when it does, the commentary can do real damage. It can damage reputation. It can damage credibility. In some cases, it can damage freedom.
Because of that, those of us who hold positions of authority – CEOs of state entities, Principal Spending Officers, Chief Directors, board chairs, directors of finance, procurement heads – must change how we approach approvals.
Let me be blunt: do not sign what you cannot defend in daylight.
- Urgency is not a defence
A common line in the public sector is: “Honourable, this is very urgent, we just need your signature so we can move.”
No.
Urgency is not a legal basis. Urgency will not protect you in front of a parliamentary committee. Urgency will not protect you when your memo is circulating on WhatsApp with your name in red circle and people saying “Look at what he authorised.”
When the document leaks, nobody will repeat the part where “time was against us.” They will repeat the part where you approved it.
Do not rush. Read.
- You must be able to explain it publicly
Before you sign, ask yourself one simple question:
If I am called tomorrow morning to Joy FM, to Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee, or to CID, can I calmly explain this approval in one clear sentence?
If the honest answer is “I’m not sure,” do not sign it yet.
This is not about fear. It is about readiness.
Leadership in the public space now includes the ability to justify decisions in plain language – not only to auditors and regulators, but to the general public, who will form an opinion long before the facts are fully understood.
If you cannot defend it, you do not fully understand it. And if you do not fully understand it, you should not be authorising it.
- Interrogate the memo, not the person
Too many approvals in our system are based on personality.
“He’s my Director of Procurement, he knows what he’s doing.”
“She’s loyal, she’ll never put me in trouble.”
“This consultant is solid, he has worked with us for years.”
That mindset is dangerous.
The test is not “Do I trust the officer?”
The test is “Can this document stand scrutiny?”
Check the numbers. Check the source of authority. Check the procurement route. Check whether it fits budget. Check whether it is within approved work plan. Check whether the expenditure is allowable.
Trust is not an internal control.
- Stay within your mandate
One of the fastest ways senior officers get into trouble is authorising things outside their lawful mandate.
A Principal Spending Officer signs off on a commitment that should have gone to the Board.
A Board Chair “directs management” to execute something that is purely an operational mandate.
A CEO authorises a variation that procurement rules do not allow.
When that document comes out, nobody will say “The process is complex.”
They will say “He authorised an illegal payment.”
Before you approve, ask yourself:
• Is this within my authority under the PFM Act?
• Is it consistent with procurement law?
• Has the Board approved this policy direction?
• Am I the right signatory for this level of commitment?
If the answer is not a clean yes, pause.
Your signature will not make an improper transaction proper. It will just tie you to it.
- Put your caution on record
Sometimes you are under pressure to move. Politics. Deadlines. External demands. Board pressure.
In those moments, you may have no option but to allow something to proceed – but you still have a responsibility to protect the institution and yourself.
Document your concern.
Write:
“Approved subject to confirmation that funds are available within approved budget.”
or
“Proceed only after legal clearance on clause 4.2.”
or
“Management to ensure full compliance with Procurement Act 663 (as amended).”
That short note can save you later. Silence can be interpreted as unconditional endorsement. A written condition shows you attempted to enforce due process.
- Assume it will leak
Operate with this mindset: Anything I sign today may be on social media tomorrow, stripped of context, amplified for politics.
Because that is exactly what is happening.
Internal audit queries now circulate on Facebook before they reach Audit Committee. Draft letters to regulators appear on radio before they get to the regulator. WhatsApp is now faster than official dispatch.
So write like the country is watching. Because eventually, it will.
The bottom line
Holding public office in 2025 is high-risk. The environment is unforgiving. There is very little benefit of the doubt.
That means you cannot sign blindly. You cannot sign emotionally. You cannot sign just to “move things along.”
Slow down. Interrogate. Be convinced. Stand by it.
Because when the memo leaks — and these days, it will — the story will not start with “This was just an internal draft.” It will start with your name.
Protect the institution. Protect the public purse. Protect yourself.
By Charles Mensah
- President Commissions 36.5 Million Dollars Hospital In The Tain District
- You Will Not Go Free For Killing An Hard Working MP – Akufo-Addo To MP’s Killer
- I Will Lead You To Victory – Ato Forson Assures NDC Supporters
Visit Our Social Media for More
About Author
