NHIA Claims Manager Raises Red Flag

Bawah Bukari, claims manager for the National Health Insurance Authority (NHIA) at the Bawku District Office in the Upper East Region, has raised concerns over the termination of his appointment.

Mr Bukari claimed he was unfairly dismissed from his position on December 22, 2013 on the grounds of negligence of duty and failure to perform his duties in the proper manner.

He, however, said the charges levelled against him for which he was dismissed after a meeting with the disciplinary committee of the authority was unfair as other colleagues, the Regional Manager of NHIS, Scheme Manager and Accountant were all charged with the same offence.

“I am human and the errors they found were human and not deliberate oversight of duties,” he told DAILY GUIDE.

“I don’t see the fairness in this as the other three people who were charged with the same offences have been reinstated but I have been sacked,” he said.

Mr Bukari was dismissed from his post following findings of a verification exercise conducted by a team from the claims directorate of the NHIA at the Bakar District Office, and 18 of its accredited facilities covering the period of January 2012 to March 2013.

The findings according to a letter dated September 26, 2013 titled: ‘Notice of Interdiction’ and addressed to Mr Bukari revealed irregularities that led to claims overpayment to some facilities to the tune of GH¢1, 151,166.90 during the period under review.

“Further investigation into the matter has already commenced and your interdiction is to allow for an uninterrupted process in this regard. You are to hand over any property of the Authority in your possession to the Upper East Regional Accountant,” the letter stated.

Dr Nii Anang Adjetey, Deputy Director of Corporate Affairs at NHIA on the other hand observed that all the respondents that appeared before the disciplinary committee were charged for irregularities in claims processing and payment system.

He said the fact that the other respondents did not get dismissed did not imply they were not sanctioned for their negligence of duties.

He said, “All the respondents were sanctioned according to the degree of their culpability.”

Mr Adjetey indicated that in the case of Bukari, the disciplinary committee concluded that as an officer in charge of claims processing, he should have been able to perform the basic task of vetting claims and reconciling the total amount on summary sheet and the amount on the individual claims form.

He said the disciplinary committee therefore found him guilty of an act of negligence in an improper manner and therefore recommended that his appointment be terminated in accordance with section 37.4 (G. J) of the collective agreement.

Comments