Illusion Of Espionage: A Rejoinder To Col. (Retired) Festus Aboagye Allegations Against Dr Addison.

For intellectual national security discourse to fester, allegations—especially those bordering on espionage—demand more than mere conjecture; they require hard evidence, rigorous forensic scrutiny, and an understanding of modern surveillance methodologies. Yet, the recent claims by Col. (Retired) Festus Aboagye that former Bank of Ghana (BoG) Governor Dr. Ernest Addison spied on the central bank after leaving office appear to be a cocktail of political sensationalism, outdated intelligence paradigms, and a fundamental misunderstanding of contemporary cybersecurity.

The Evolution of Surveillance: From Bugs to Cyber Espionage

The days of rudimentary wiretapping and covertly installed listening devices are relics of a bygone era. Today, advanced cyber-monitoring tools, AI-powered surveillance systems, and metadata analysis define the architecture of institutional security. The Bank of Ghana, like all central financial institutions, operates within a regulatory ecosystem that includes cybersecurity laws, the Bank of Ghana Act, and financial security protocols. If espionage were to occur, it would not be through archaic means but through highly sophisticated cyber intrusions requiring state-level hacking capabilities—an assertion that Col. Aboagye fails to substantiate.

The suggestion is that Dr. Addison, a seasoned economist engaged in espionage, assumes a level of external penetration into the BoG’s highly encrypted database. Given its multi-layered firewalls, biometric access controls, and data encryption protocols, unauthorized surveillance would require more than traditional intelligence maneuvering; it would necessitate a sophisticated cyber breach—a feat well beyond the scope of the baseless accusations being peddled.

Under Ghana’s Electronic Communications Act (2008) and Data Protection Act (2012), unauthorized surveillance, interception of communication, and data breaches are criminal offenses. Even national security agencies require a judicial warrant to monitor individuals or institutions. If Dr. Addison were guilty of such acts, the appropriate legal recourse would have been an official prosecution, not a media trial based on speculation and anecdotal assertions.

The reported raid on Dr. Addison’s residence by National Security operatives raises fundamental questions about state power and individual rights. Ghana’s 1992 Constitution (Article 18) guarantees privacy, and any encroachment must be justified by a clear and present danger—not political expediency. If security agencies act on hearsay rather than credible intelligence, the country risks slipping into an era where national security is weaponized for political ends.

Col. Aboagye’s perspective appears trapped in an era where intelligence operations relied on physical surveillance. Today, cyber espionage operates in the realms of deepfake technology, AI-driven data mining, and quantum cryptography. To suggest that a former central bank governor resorted to primitive forms of surveillance is akin to accusing an AI-driven drone of using carrier pigeons for reconnaissance.

In Ghana’s polarized political landscape, accusations often serve as weapons of strategic deception. The timing and nature of these espionage claims hint at a broader political agenda rather than a legitimate security concern. When national security discourse becomes contaminated with partisan influences, it erodes public trust in institutions and undermines the credibility of genuine security operations.

Any credible espionage allegation must establish three key pillars:

1. Intent:- A demonstrable motive to engage in spying.
2. Capability- The technological means to execute surveillance.
3. Evidence- Forensic proof of unauthorized access or transmission of confidential data.

Without clear digital footprints—such as unauthorized logins, intercepted transmissions, or cyber anomalies—these claims remain speculative at best and defamatory at worst.

Ghana’s Evidence Act (Act 30, Section 29) renders illegally obtained evidence inadmissible in court. If the surveillance claims against Dr. Addison were valid, they would require lawful evidence-gathering methods. A reliance on security gossip and unverified media leaks does not meet the threshold for legal scrutiny.

If espionage had truly occurred, cybersecurity experts could trace unauthorized data flows, pinpoint external breaches, and establish a chain of evidence. Yet, the silence from forensic auditors suggests that the claims are hollow—fueled more by political narratives than digital forensics.

When national security becomes an instrument for political intimidation, the long-term consequences are dire. The misuse of security forces in politically motivated investigations creates an environment where dissenting voices and independent professionals—like a former BoG Governor—can be unfairly targeted, setting a dangerous precedent.

Central banks operate under stringent financial and operational regulations. Surveillance within such institutions requires multi-agency oversight, involving entities like the Financial Intelligence Centre and the Securities and Exchange Commission. To suggest that an individual, post-exit, could compromise these structures without detection is an oversimplification that disregards the institutional safeguards in place.

The integrity of national security institutions is predicated on their ability to operate independently of political influence. When security agencies appear to be executing politically motivated agendas, it erodes their credibility and diminishes their effectiveness in tackling real security threats.

Espionage allegations against a former BoG Governor have broader economic implications. International investors assess political stability before committing to financial markets. If Ghana’s central bank is perceived as vulnerable to internal espionage, it could trigger capital flight, weaken investor confidence, and destabilize the cedi—consequences far graver than the political mileage some seek to gain from these claims.

Given the gravity of the accusations, an independent parliamentary or judicial probe is the most appropriate mechanism to assess their validity. An impartial investigation would separate facts from fiction and prevent politically motivated security theatrics from undermining genuine national security concerns.

In national security matters, facts must always outweigh fiction, and evidence must always trump conjecture. Col. Aboagye’s claims, rooted in outdated intelligence paradigms, fail to meet the standards of modern espionage analysis. If national security is to remain a pillar of state integrity, it must resist the temptation of political sensationalism and uphold the principles of objectivity, technological accuracy, and legal soundness.

Until credible forensic evidence is presented, the espionage narrative surrounding Dr. Addison remains a cautionary tale of how security discourse can be manipulated for political ends. Ghana’s democratic and economic stability depends on ensuring that national security is not weaponized for personal or political vendettas.

By: ZAKARI GUA JNR. a.k.a Scorpio 🦂
SECURITY AND JUSTICE ⚖️ ADVOCATE
Email: [email protected]