Given the legal trouble they find themselves in, they can be coerced into embellishing their statements or even outright lying in exchange for getting off scot-free.
Julie Paditongan’s startling revelations against Atong Ang in the alleged murder of the missing sabungeros have brought to life the crucial role whistleblowers play in uncovering corruption and other wrongdoings in high places.
Considering the covert nature of corruption cases, their testimonies are welcomed and not outright dismissed, since they provide the only way some illegal activities can be exposed and punished. Traditional ways of reporting to authorities simply do not work.
Elected officials and those in power wield so much influence that they can practically intimidate anyone who is privy to their unlawful behavior into remaining silent. As they cover their tracks, the only way these people can be held accountable is when a whistleblower surfaces and gives his statements, albeit risking incriminating himself in the process.
This is why the Supreme Court gives so much credence to declarations whistleblowers make. It does not require them to provide pieces of documentary evidence or even corroborations made by other witnesses to establish the credibility of their factual allegations.
In fact, their statements can become the sole basis of conviction. Given the surreptitious ways by which the illegal transactions are carried out, compelling them to present direct proof of the alleged acts seems utterly...
The Minister of State in charge of Government Communications, Felix Kwakye Ofosu, has called out the Member of Parliament for Old Tafo, Vincent Ekow Assafuah, for peddling falsehoods about Mahama'...