The conflicting accounts issued by the Turkish Embassy and the Ministry of Finance regarding payments to Karpowership have raised more questions than answers, and the Ministry’s latest “clarification” does little to resolve the fundamental inconsistencies at the heart of this issue.
First, the Embassy’s statement explicitly confirmed that Karpowership was fully paid in June and July and that “there is no new payment expected.” This directly contradicts Finance Minister Seedy Keita’s briefing to the National Assembly, where he stated that part of the expanded 45 million dollar World Bank package would be used to settle arrears owed to the Turkish firm. The Embassy’s communication suggests that no arrears exist.
In its reaction, the Ministry claims that the government paid Karpower in advance, and that once the World Bank releases the 45 million dollar support package, the Bank will reimburse the government for arrears that have “already been settled.” However, this explanation introduces several loopholes and unclear facts:
The Ministry’s Explanation Conflicts With Its Own Language
The Minister initially spoke of outstanding arrears that needed to be cleared. If government had already paid these arrears months ago, why describe them as “outstanding” at the time of his parliamentary briefing?
This discrepancy suggests either poor communication or a deliberate framing intended to create the impression that the World Bank funds were urgently needed to pay Karpower.
Lack of Transparency on the “Advance Payment”
The Ministry offers no details on:
When exactly this “advance payment” was made
Under what authority or budget line
Whether the National Assembly was informed or approvals were sought
Why the Ministry failed to disclose this advance earlier
For a transaction reportedly large enough to require World Bank reimbursement, the opacity is alarming.
The World Bank’s Role Remains Unverified
The Ministry claims that the World Bank will reimburse government for payments already made.
But:
The World Bank has not issued any statement confirming this reimbursement arrangement
No documentation or agreement has been shared to support the Ministry’s assertion
Without independent confirmation, the Ministry’s explanation rests solely on its own word, an insufficient basis when public finances are involved.
Poor Sequencing or Poor Communication?
The Ministry now insists this was merely a matter of “sequencing”, government paid first, the World Bank will reimburse later.
If this sequencing is legitimate and agreed upon, why:
Did the Minister not explain this clearly during his briefing to lawmakers?
Did it require a media exposé and foreign embassy intervention before the Ministry clarified its position?
The timing suggests the “sequencing” argument is reactive, not procedural.
Attempt to Reframe Rather Than Clarify
The Ministry’s closing admonition urging media houses to verify information appears misplaced.
In this case:
The Turkish Embassy provided factual clarification
The Ministry’s own earlier communication was incomplete or misleading
Rather than addressing the inconsistencies, the Ministry shifts blame onto journalists and reframes the issue as a misunderstanding caused by the press.
The evolving explanations from the Ministry expose gaps in transparency, inconsistencies in official communication, and a troubling lack of clarity in the management of significant public financial transactions. Until the Ministry provides:
documentation of the “advance payment,”
evidence of World Bank reimbursement arrangements, and
a coherent explanation reconciling its public statements,
the public is left with legitimate concerns about the accuracy of information presented to both the National Assembly and the nation.
The attempt to downplay these contradictions as a mere “sequencing matter” fails to address the deeper issues of accountability and credibility at the Ministry of Finance.
Saikou Camara
UDP Administrative Secretary, Media and Communication
The conflicting accounts issued by the Turkish Embassy and the Ministry of Finance regarding payments to Karpowership have raised more questions than answers, and the Ministry’s latest “clarification” does little to resolve the fundamental inconsistencies at the heart of this issue. First, the Embassy’s statement explicitly confirmed that Karpowership was fully paid in June and The Fatu Network
