Patricia Appiagyei, Ghana: Denies GH¢70,000 Memo, Calls It Fabricated

• Deputy Minority Leader Patricia Appiagyei has vehemently denied authoring or authorizing a memo regarding an alleged GH¢70,000 payment.
• The circulating document purportedly suggested she rejected money linked to the Ghana Parliament's Appointments Committee work.
• Madam Appiagyei labeled the memo as fabricated and expressed strong concerns about potential signature forgery.
• She denied personally receiving any funds or having knowledge of other Minority members, including Alexander Afenyo-Markin, receiving such payments.
• Investigations are currently underway to determine the origin of the disputed document.

She categorically stated that she had neither authored, authorized, nor disseminated any document pertaining to this specific issue.

Deputy Minority Leader Patricia Appiagyei has issued a forceful denial regarding her involvement in a contentious memo that has recently entered public circulation. The document purportedly rejected an alleged GH¢70,000 payment, which was reportedly linked to the recent parliamentary vetting process for ministerial and Supreme Court nominees in Ghana. The memo specifically suggested that Madam Appiagyei had returned funds purportedly received for her contributions to the work of Parliament’s Appointments Committee. She categorically stated that she had neither authored, authorized, nor disseminated any document pertaining to this specific issue.

Speaking on JoyFM’s Top Story on Friday, September 4, Madam Appiagyei characterized the circulating memo as entirely fabricated, expressing considerable bewilderment that such a document was being attributed to her. She firmly refuted claims of personally receiving the GH¢70,000, whether directly from the Majority Chief Whip or indirectly through the Minority Chief Whip. Furthermore, she clarified that she had no knowledge of any other Minority member of the Appointments Committee, including Minority Leader Alexander Afenyo-Markin, having received any such payments, directly addressing the Alexander Afenyo-Markin payment claims.

The Deputy Minority Leader conveyed her deep distress regarding the public circulation of the memo, particularly given that it bore her name and was presented as her own work. She characterized the document as "totally fake" and suggested it might be an attempt to sow discord within their caucus. The incident, she noted, had already led to a strain in some of her personal relationships, underscoring the immediate impact of such a false communication.

Madam Appiagyei also voiced significant signature forgery concerns Ghana parliament, highlighting the increasing ease with which technological tools can be used to manipulate official documents. She explained that scanning and replicating signatures has become simpler, making it challenging to definitively authenticate documents in the digital age. This technological vulnerability, she suggested, makes individuals less secure against such deceptive practices, even acknowledging that slight variations in genuine signatures can be overlooked when fakes are produced.

In the wake of these serious allegations and denials, investigations are reportedly underway to ascertain the true origin of the disputed document. However, Madam Appiagyei indicated that at this preliminary stage, she was unable to provide specific details regarding where the memo originated, emphasizing that the process to uncover its source is ongoing. This ongoing inquiry aims to shed light on who created and disseminated the fabricated document Patricia Appiagyei has so strongly disavowed.

This incident underscores the significant legal and reputational risks associated with the circulation of fabricated documents and potential signature forgery in high-profile political contexts in Ghana. The alleged Ghana parliamentary vetting payment memo, and the subsequent denial by a prominent political figure, highlight the critical importance of verifying official communications and financial allegations, particularly those involving public figures and parliamentary processes like the Ghana Appointments Committee payment claims. Such events necessitate robust internal investigations and can lead to serious legal ramifications for those responsible for creating and disseminating false information, potentially impacting public trust in legislative bodies.

This incident underscores the legal and reputational risks associated with fabricated documents and potential signature forgery in high-profile political contexts. Lawyers and compliance officers should note the importance of verifying official communications and financial allegations, and be prepared to advise on potential defamation claims or internal investigations arising from such incidents.

Source: Original reporting via Prince Adu-Owusu on September 4, 2026.