Former Member of Parliament for Zebilla, Mr John Ndebugre, says he has a difficulty accepting the Castle’s claims that former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice Mr Martin Amidu was sacked for misconduct.He says his mistrust is rooted in the government’s inconsistent and disjointed narration of events that transpired at a January 13 meeting chaired by President Mills.The statement sacking Mr Amidu , and signed by Chief of Staff, Mr Henry Martey Newman, said the Attorney-General misconducted himself in a manner inconsistent with the standard expected of ministers and the president’s appointees.Communication Director at the presidency, Mr Koku Anyidoho subsequently explained that Mr Amidu was sacked for failing to provide proof for his claims that “the attacks against me which started in the Daily Post publications of the 3rd January 2012 were planned by a colleague Minister of State, who perceived that my integrity and professionalism as a lawyer was a threat to the concealment of gargantuan crimes against the people of Ghana in which they might be implicated.”And speaking on Citi FM Saturday, Mr Ndebugre said the Castle’s own rendition of events does not add up. Reading from a Daily Graphic publication on what transpired at the meeting , the former Zebilla MP said it was inconceivable that an AG who appeared capitulated and virtually begged for forgiveness, as reported by the paper, could at the same time be said to have misconducted himself in ways that detract from his position as an AG and thereby necessitating his dismissal.“If you go into a closed-door meeting with someone and come out to tell us that you are sacking him for misconduct, how can we believe you”? he asked.Could the so-called misconduct, Mr Ndebugre surmised, be that the president prevailed on Mr Amidu to publicly withdraw his ‘gargantuan crimes’ statement which he, being the principled man that he is, refused to do and which refusal, in the view of the presidency constituted misconduct? According to Mr Ndebugre, the publicly rebuked Martin Amidu is one politician who believes in politics of conviction not convenience. He is absolutely convinced if President Mills insisted on Mr Amidu withdrawing the statement and the AG believed in the trueness of his comments, he will stand by them and damn the consequences, unlike some other politicians who for purposes of convenience would either never have raised the issues publicly at all or, if they did, would ignominiously have withdrawn their comments.The Editor-In-Chief of the New Crusading Guide, Malik Kweku Baako, speaking on Joy FM’s Newsfile, said if Mr Anyidoho’s submissions are to be believed, it would be interesting that president Mills, who while in opposition faulted president Kufuor for calling for evidence from those who alleged corruption, is today asking for evidence.He said the president should live his advice to then president to investigate allegations of corruption instead of asking for proof and institute an inquiry into Mr Amidu’s revelations.