Vice President of IMANI Africa, Bright Simons, has cast doubt on the feasibility of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) government's proposed Operation Recover All Loot (ORAL).

He stated that while the initiative enjoys widespread public support, its chances of recovering substantial sums remain slim.

Speaking on Joy News’ Newsfile on Saturday, February 15, he underscored the enthusiasm surrounding ORAL, acknowledging that many Ghanaians view it as a necessary step towards accountability.

However, he cautioned against unrealistic expectations regarding how much of the alleged stolen funds could actually be retrieved.

“My view is, first of all, ORAL is extremely popular,” he said. “I know people who have said that they didn’t buy into the entire NDC agenda—all this 24-hour economy and the rest of it—but if only they would hold people accountable in Ghana and stem the flow of impunity, they would be happy.”

Despite this popularity, Bright Simons stressed the importance of treating ORAL as a serious policy initiative rather than a political slogan, urging measurable targets.

He suggested a benchmark where “if they can prosecute 50% of the cases, if they can secure 50% convictions, if of those, 50% are willing to pay back in and through that effort recoveries can be made, then, to my mind, you’ve done well.”

However, he was quick to clarify that his suggestion was a stretch target, not a forecast.

“I was not saying that I’m forecasting that they will be able to retrieve 12.5%. I was setting a stretch target,” he emphasised.

One of the major issues Mr Simons raised was the distinction between the estimated financial damage caused by corruption and the actual recoverable amount.

Citing bloated figures—ranging from $20.8 billion to $28.9 billion—he noted that many misunderstand these sums to be immediately reclaimable.

“The confusion that I think has arisen is that some people think what has been seen is that they can recover all $21.1 billion or $20.8 billion,” he explained.

“What they were saying is that this is the damage that they estimate from these cases that they’ve examined. The fiscal damage to the country is not necessarily the recoverable target.”

Bright Simons then examined specific cases, illustrating the difficulty in retrieving looted funds. He pointed to the famous $4.5 billion National Service Authority case, questioning the methodology behind the estimated losses.

“If you take all the baggage of the National Service Secretariat since it was founded to date, and you added all that, and it’s only $4.5 billion, it will be significantly less,” he stated.

“If you take the 8,000 ghost names that Fourth Estate has identified, and you multiply the income that these ghosts were earning, you come to about a billion cedis a year.

"Even if you say this has been happening for three years, or whatever, 3 billion cedis—you still don’t come anywhere close to $4.5 billion. Maybe 5% of that.”

Discussing COVID-19-related expenditures, he pointed out that much of the money had already been disbursed to the public in forms that make recovery nearly impossible.

“Most of that money—you saw it on the streets with all the free water, free electricity, food being thrown about. You know, expenditure that was made for Ghana Cares, which led to loans distributed randomly to all manner of people.

"My sense is that a lot of it was wasted. The fact that it was wasted does not otherwise mean, though, that you can use the criminal process to recover it.”

Mr Simons elaborated on the legal hurdles, stating that to recover funds through criminal proceedings, there must be clear proof of crime.

“To be able to recover through the criminal process, you must establish crime,” he said.

“You must convince people that, you know, as I gave this money as free water in the street, I’m now so guilty, I’m going to put my hand in my own pocket and bring that money out.”

Using the controversial National Cathedral case as an example, he acknowledged that it might be more straightforward in terms of identifying liable parties.

“National Cathedral is a bit more clear-cut in the sense that you know the identifiable contractors. Whether or not you will be able to get the money out of them is another matter. But at least you could make the case that the money was ill-spent.”