Recently the Anas video came out and shocked us all to the marrow, as some of the things on there were just sickening.

The investigator, who has earned plaudits worldwide for similar works in the past, came in for even more adulation as the depth of the judicial corruption in Ghana was laid bare.

Martin Amidu is a former Minister under the Mills administration who has recently earned a reputation as a citizen vigilante. Amidu says what he is not supposed to say, consequences be damned.

In a report he has released on the Anas video, Amidu touches on many issues surrounding the affair.

Whilst he praises Anas and his Tiger Eye team for the work done, he also makes an astounding claim as to the genesis of the entire investigation.

“I have said that the undercover investigation that led to the judicial corruption expose was commissioned by the Government of Ghana and has its genesis in the acrimonious relationship between the Government and the Judiciary on the assumption of power in 2009 by the Government and the constant demand by the Judiciary for proof of judicial corruption from Government and its associates. I was Presidential Advisor on Legal Affairs in the second half of 2009, I was Minister for the Interior in 2010, and the Attorney General in 2011 before I left office in 2012. I therefore know what I am talking about.” he wrote.

Amidu also claims that whilst the investigations covered more than the judiciary, other aspects are being suppressed by Government to protect politicians who were also implicated in the scandal.

“What I did not know was that the method of exposing corruption in the judiciary and parliament was going to be through commissioning covert anti-corruptionpreneurs as government agents (to secretly collaborate with established security agencies) to allow for possible deniability. But I do not think that the late President Mills intended to suppress the results of the Parliamentary corruption investigation by compromising it and using only the results of the judicial corruption investigations to damnify the judiciary knowing quite well that whatever results to be obtained will only be the tip of the ice berg.

“The Government ought to be congratulated for its ingenuity in being able to suppress part of the truth and to turn the displeasure of public anger away from political corruption to only judicial corruption and to take all the credit. The ingenuity, however, becomes farcical when the Attorney General grants immunity and protection to entrepreneurial Government Commissioned undercover agents who collaborate with established security agencies as independent whistleblowers under the Whistleblowers Act, 2006 (Act 720) and contrary to the prohibition of the Police Service (Private Security Organizations) Regulations, 1992 (L.I. 1571).”