Dr Sawyerr had criticised Mr Rawlings for his frequent attacks on the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) and former President Mahama.
Moments after the Former President granted an interview to a section of the press in which he asserts Dr Sawyerr is threatened by his integrity, she has shot back, questioning Mr Rawlings’ definition of persons with integrity.
In an interview with the Daily Post on Wednesday -- soon after former President Rawlings' remarks -- Dr. Sawyerr said “Rawlings' position that I am threatened by his integrity to be true, three premises must be established: a. that he has integrity, b. that I do not have integrity and c. that I am intimidated in any form or manner by the integrity he must first have.”
According to her, all three premises are false so Rawlings’ claim that she is threatened by his integrity cannot be true.
“But maybe the headlines have not been fair to him. In the voice clip I listened to, he did not say those who lack integrity feel threatened 'by those of us who have integrity'. He said those who lack integrity feel threatened 'by those of us who have the influence of integrity'.
She queried what the meaning of 'influence of integrity' is, rhetorically asking whether it refers to "those perceived as having integrity even though they may not have it; those who can influence others to be persons of integrity even though they themselves may not be persons of integrity; or those who make enough noise about integrity so they are seen as being influential in matters of integrity even if they themselves do not have integrity?"
She adds: "I am really not sure what he is trying to say".
She said she was highly amused by the whole incident and likened the former President's utterances to a "squeak" and not a "roaring volcano" as others have sought to describe the former Presidents reply.