The swirling controversy around Sammy Gyamfi, CEO of Goldbod, and a petition filed with the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), has seemingly reached its conclusion. What began with accusations of impropriety and a formal request for investigation has ended with a withdrawn petition, raising questions about the circumstances surrounding the case and the implications for public accountability.

On a seemingly ordinary day, May 10, 2025, videos surfaced showing Mr. Sammy Gyamfi gifting bundles of US dollars to Nana Agradaa. This act sparked public outcry and prompted a private citizen, Eric Dumenu Akatsi, to file a petition with CHRAJ, citing alleged corruption and abuse of office. However, the pursuit of this case took an unexpected turn when Akatsi abruptly withdrew his petition, signaling an end to the formal inquiry. The events highlight complex aspects of public scrutiny and influence.

The withdrawal of the CHRAJ petition against Sammy Gyamfi brings to a close an episode that sparked public debate and raised questions about transparency and accountability. But what led to this sudden change of heart? And what does it mean for the individuals and institutions involved?

Why Was the CHRAJ Petition Against Sammy Gyamfi Withdrawn?

The decision to withdraw the petition came directly from Eric Dumenu Akatsi himself. On May 14, 2025, just days after filing his request for a probe, Akatsi formally rescinded his petition, effectively halting any further action by CHRAJ. In a formal letter, Akatsi stated, “After careful consideration, I have decided that it is in the best interest to withdraw this petition.”

While Akatsi did not elaborate on the specific reasons behind his decision, he made it clear that he wished to discontinue the matter. His letter served as a formal notice to CHRAJ to cease all further action related to the petition, leaving many to speculate about the motivations behind his sudden change of heart.

The Initial Allegations Against Sammy Gyamfi

The CHRAJ petition stemmed from an incident on May 10, 2025, when videos circulated showing Mr. Gyamfi gifting bundles of US dollars to Nana Agradaa. This act sparked public outcry and led Eric Dumenu Akatsi to file a formal complaint.

Akatsi’s petition specifically referenced Article 218(e) of the 1992 Constitution, which empowers CHRAJ to investigate allegations of corruption and abuse of power by public officials. Akatsi labeled the dollar-splashing act as “a perfectly clear instance of alleged engagement in suspected corruption,” arguing that it warranted a full investigation by the commission.

Threats and Intimidation: A Factor in the Withdrawal?

In the days leading up to the withdrawal of his petition, Eric Dumenu Akatsi reported receiving threats to his life. This revelation added a disturbing layer to the case, raising questions about potential intimidation and external pressures. “Some of these people are invoking insults and threats as though I committed a crime,” he said, expressing his concerns about the hostile reaction he had faced.

Despite the threats, Akatsi clarified his position, stating, “Let me put on record that I have nothing against Sammy Gyamfi. I am only exercising my right as a citizen.” This statement underscored his belief in the importance of holding public officials accountable, even in the face of adversity. Whether these threats played a direct role in his decision to withdraw the petition remains unclear, but they undoubtedly cast a shadow over the entire process.

The Presidency’s Response and Resolution

Following the initial controversy, Julius Debrah, the Chief of Staff, formally cautioned Mr. Gyamfi, urging him to consider public sentiment and uphold the standards of public office. According to government spokesperson Felix Kwakye Ofosu, the Presidency believes that no further actions are necessary beyond the apology and the caution issued by the Chief of Staff. “So in view of that, the Presidency does not believe that any further actions ought to be taken beyond the apology and the caution,” Ofosu stated.

Key Takeaways from the Sammy Gyamfi CHRAJ Case

The CHRAJ investigation into Sammy Gyamfi’s conduct has officially ended due to the petitioner’s withdrawal. The Presidency considers the matter resolved following Gyamfi’s apology and a formal caution from the Chief of Staff. The incident highlights the ethical considerations surrounding public displays of wealth by individuals in prominent positions.

In the end, the withdrawal of the CHRAJ petition against Sammy Gyamfi marks the conclusion of a controversial chapter. While the initial allegations sparked public debate and raised questions about ethical conduct, the matter has been officially closed following the petitioner’s decision and the Presidency’s response. The case serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency and accountability in public life. Further investigations into the specific accusations are unlikely given the current official stance. The incident underscores the existing legal framework regarding conduct of public officials and the power of the constitution.