I recall the good old days when as kids, we fail to adequately prepare for exam. We spend our days playing and only cram the last minute "apor" for the early morning exam. When "apor" swerves on a typical question like “what is a worm? You end up answering; “a worm is any animal eaten by a frog”, in that case, what is a frog? Because in fact the frog is the only thing you studied for.
Sadly, you realize too late, the evidence being your grade on the notice board, that your teacher does not share your humor.

The morale of the lesson? When you need to laugh, you don’t tickle yourself.
The teachers work is done when the student suddenly realizes he has one more question to ask; this is called the Eureka effect.

Similarly, I am glad my rebuttal has found place in the understanding of my fellow patriot albeit the stagnant lack of answers in the article later issued dubbed “a few questions for Alan Kyerematen”.

Notwithstanding the inability of this article to provide factual answers to my very direct questions before, I will endeavor to provide answers to these additional questions which has arisen only after my rebuttal.
Alan’s Role in the 2012 campaign

In paragraph 2 of his statement, Mr. Agyarko states "In February of 2011, Mr. Kyerematen, Nana Addo and I had a brief discussion in Nana's office about his role in the campaign. Later that morning, I had another meeting with Mr. Kyerematen to discuss his role. He intimated he wanted the discussion to continue after his return from Addis Ababa and he promised to stay in touch. In the whole time he was away, he never called ONCE to even check on the progress of the campaign. And of course, he did not return in April as he had indicated."
I still notice with growing interest that the focus of this subsequent post has significantly shifted from the factual matters of inquiry, which my rebuttal questioned. However it seems to be rather centered on the extent of involvement of Mr. Alan Kyerematen on the said campaign.

This is worthy of notice, as this goes to indicate Mr. Kyerematen demonstrated interest in the campaign and granted audience to the meetings. Between November 2011 and December 2012 Mr. Kyerematen had travelled into the country 11 times and spent weeks, despite keeping up with tight schedules in Addis Ababa, purposely for the campaign.
During these periods in Ghana, Mr. Alan Kyerematen attended every major NPP event. He was therefore informed, present to assist, and also availed himself in the campaign process.


Contributions to Manifesto
Mr. Kyerematen did make invaluable contributions to the 2012 manifesto especially in areas related to trade and industry. This is evident in the draft he presented to Chairman of the Manifesto Committee.
Did he ever call the campaign manager, Mr. Agyarko, even ONCE, to check on the progress of the 2012 campaign? Who is the best person to update you on campaign progress than the campaign manager?
The question above seem to now swing the issue of contention to if Mr. Alan Kyerematen had called Mr. Agyarko to acquaint himself with matters of the campaign. Perhaps, placing a call to the campaign manager also constitutes a major task in the campaign process? Should he have called to inquire about the campaign despite his presence in the country and involvement in the campaign simultaneously?
Summarily the point still remains, Mr. Kyerematen was available, involved and fully contributed his quota to the campaign and its aftermath.
Supreme Court accreditation
As Mr. Agyarko so famously said, “Was Mr. Kyerematen, the ‘international man’, expecting the party to specially reserve a card out of the 25 for him so that on any day he felt like flying in, a card would be waiting for him? That would have been grossly unfair to those who hung around the court house daily, devising clever ways to enter.

With regards to the Supreme Court hearings, I am extremely surprised that he keeps going on about not being given accreditation. After all, aside from appearing at the Supreme Court to show one’s support, there were many other activities involved in putting the petition before the Supreme Court.

It is a matter of public record that the entire NPP received only 25 accreditation cards per sitting. Our one hundred and twenty-three Members of Parliament had to share 5 cards. They quickly devised a system where, on any given day they would select five Members who would attend. The party did not assign me accreditation I made arrangements with someone who could not attend on Thursdays and used his card as such.”
Mr. Alan Kyerematen, true to his position as a concerned party member showed up in court with keen interest in the historic election petition. This information is available to all Ghanaians who followed the proceedings to know.


He rightly decided to remain proactive and work around the impenetrable system of card sharing, to get accreditation for himself. This only goes to buttress his demonstrable zeal and commitment to all matters of party concern.
His presence at the proceedings demonstrated his single belief in the supremacy and unity of the party above all other interest. He contributed his quota in presence, knowledge, strength and substance to the campaign and aftermath.
To state the obvious, Mr. Boakye Agyarko’s effusions rather re-affirmed Mr. Alan Kyerematens position on how he was treated during the 2012 campaign.
In conclusion, our two time defeated flag bearer, Nana Akufo Addo, remains one of the greatest witness of Mr. Alan Kyerematen’s deep involvement in the 2012 campaign. These are facts which Nana Akufo Addo cannot deny and I believe he would be in the best position to answer the article written by his capable aide titled “a few questions for Mr. Alan Kyerematen”

Chief Obosu Mohammed
NPP Member, Mfantseman