THE OSP V. KEN OFORI ATTA: THE FOREPLAY AND BEDMATICS WITH THE LAW
The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP), has declared former Finance Minister, Ken Ofori-Atta, a wanted fugitive in connection with multiple corruption-related investigations. This declaration has sparked significant legal debate, regarding the OSP's authority and the broader legal implications of such an action.
On February 12, 2025, the OSP announced that Mr. Ofori-Atta was wanted
for questioning in several high-profile cases, including: the Strategic
Mobilization-GRA Contract, termination of the ECG-GXC Contract, payments
related to the National Cathedral, and the Ambulance Procurement Contract.
The OSP stated that Mr. Ofori-Atta had failed to honor multiple
invitations for questioning and had left the country indefinitely, citing
medical reasons. The OSP expressed skepticism regarding the authenticity of the
medical documentation provided and declared him a fugitive from justice.
Legal Implications
The OSP's declaration has been met with criticism from various legal
experts and political figures who question the legality of such a move without
a court order.
To start with some practitioners stated that the declaration lacks
Judicial Authorization. Some legal practitioners argue that the OSP does not
possess the unilateral power to declare an individual wanted without obtaining
a warrant from a court. They contend that such actions should be sanctioned by
the judiciary to ensure due process is followed.
Another concern raised is the breach of procedural jurisprudence.
Critics emphasize that the proper legal procedure involves the OSP applying to
a court for an arrest warrant if an individual fails to comply with
investigative processes. By bypassing this step, the OSP's actions may be
deemed procedurally improper.
Precedents
The controversy centres around the interpretation of the OSP's mandates, as outlined in the law. The Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017
(Act 959), establishes the OSP's functions and powers, including the
investigation and prosecution of corruption-related offenses. However, the Act
does not explicitly grant the OSP the authority to declare individuals as
fugitives without judicial oversight.
In Ghana, law enforcement agencies are generally required to obtain
court-issued warrants before declaring individuals wanted. This procedure
ensures adherence to due process and the protection of individual rights.
A pertinent case highlighting the importance of adhering to proper
warrant procedures is the case of the Republic v. Baaba Sam.
In January 2025, an arrest warrant was issued for Ms. Sam in connection with an
alleged unlawful child removal. However, upon scrutiny, it was revealed that
the warrant lacked proper judicial authorization and was procured through
questionable means. Consequently, the District Court set aside the
"illegal" arrest warrant, emphasizing the critical need for law
enforcement agencies to follow due process and obtain valid court-issued
warrants before declaring individuals wanted.
Legal Framework
The Criminal Procedure Code, 1960 (Act 30) outlines the procedures for
arrests and the issuance of warrants in Ghana. Key provisions include:
Section 75: A warrant
of arrest may be directed to one or more police officers, or to any other
person if immediate execution is necessary and no police officer is available.
Section 77: The
executing officer must bring the arrested person before the court without
unnecessary delay.
Section 79: When a
warrant is to be executed outside the jurisdiction of the issuing court, it may
be forwarded to a magistrate within the jurisdiction where it is to be executed
for endorsement.
The legal framework in Ghana mandates that law enforcement agencies
secure court-issued warrants prior to declaring individuals wanted. This
process upholds the principles of due process and safeguards individual rights
as enshrined in Chapter 5 of the Constitution, 1992. Deviations from this
procedure, as evidenced in the case of Ms. Baaba Sam, can lead to legal
challenges and the nullification of improperly issued warrants. In contrast, this
situation underscores the importance of balancing effective anti-corruption
efforts with the preservation of legal rights and due process. As the discourse
continues, it is imperative for the OSP and other relevant authorities to
clarify the legal frameworks governing such declarations to ensure actions are
both effective and lawful.
Comments
Post a Comment