OSP Clarifies Stance on Ken Ofori-Atta Charges: “We Don’t Pander to People, We Follow the Law”
In the ongoing Ghana corruption investigations, the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) addresses public concerns over procedural delays in handling charges against former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta. This detailed guide breaks down the facts, legal processes, and implications for transparency in anti-corruption efforts.
Introduction
The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) in Ghana has reaffirmed its commitment to strict legal adherence amid scrutiny over charges filed against Ken Ofori-Atta, the former Finance Minister. On November 22, 2024, during an appearance on JoyNews’ Newsfile program, Samuel Darko, Director of Strategy, Research, and Communications at the OSP, dismissed allegations of deliberate delays. He emphasized that OSP Ofori-Atta charges follow established criminal procedure laws, particularly when the accused is outside Ghana’s jurisdiction.
This incident highlights key aspects of Ghana’s anti-corruption framework, including service of summons, Interpol Red Notices, and the balance between public demand for swift justice and due process. Understanding these OSP procedures ensures informed public discourse on high-profile cases like the Ken Ofori-Atta fees investigation.
Analysis
Background on OSP Ofori-Atta Charges
The OSP, established under the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959), investigates and prosecutes corruption involving public officers. Ken Ofori-Atta, who served as Finance Minister from 2017 to 2024, faces charges related to alleged financial improprieties. Charges have been filed, but serving them has been complicated by his location abroad.
Samuel Darko explained that Ghanaian criminal law mandates personal service of charges on the accused, not their lawyers. This is codified in the Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30), which requires summons or warrants to be delivered directly to the individual. Since Ofori-Atta is not in Ghana, the OSP applied for a summons to serve him internationally.
Misinformation and Public Perception
Darko highlighted recurring misinformation portraying the OSP as inactive, which undermines institutional credibility. Such narratives often stem from ignorance of procedural requirements or deliberate distortion. For instance, during the investigation phase, lawyers urged immediate charging without securing the accused’s presence, contrary to legal allowances for investigators to ensure attendance first.
Interpol Red Notice Involvement
Intelligence revealed Ofori-Atta traveling to destinations like the United Kingdom, Hong Kong, and the United States, despite claims of illness preventing his appearance before investigators. In response, the OSP secured an arrest warrant and issued an Interpol Red Notice to restrict his movements. An Interpol Red Notice is an international alert for provisional arrest, facilitating extradition under mutual legal assistance treaties.
Summary
In summary, the OSP has filed charges against Ken Ofori-Atta but adheres to due process by pursuing personal service abroad via summons. Samuel Darko stressed that the OSP listens to public concerns but prioritizes law over pressure, countering delay accusations. This approach includes prior actions like the Interpol Red Notice to enforce compliance, demonstrating proactive anti-corruption measures in Ghana.
Key Points
- Personal Service Requirement: Criminal charges must be served directly on the accused, not attorneys, per Ghanaian law.
- Accused’s Location: Ofori-Atta’s presence outside Ghana necessitates international summons procedures.
- No Pandering: OSP follows due process despite public or political impatience.
- Interpol Action: Red Notice issued after evidence of international travel amid investigation summons evasion.
- Misinformation Impact: False narratives erode OSP credibility and public trust in Ghana’s justice system.
Practical Advice
Navigating Legal News on Corruption Cases
For citizens tracking OSP investigations like the Ofori-Atta charges, verify information from official sources such as the OSP website or court records. Avoid social media rumors; cross-reference with legal experts or outlets like JoyNews.
Understanding Due Process in Ghana
When following high-profile cases, recognize that delays often stem from jurisdictional challenges. Educate yourself on Act 959 and Act 30 via the Ghana Legal Information Institute (GhaLII) for better comprehension of timelines in corruption probes.
Reporting Suspicious Activities
If aware of potential corruption, submit tips anonymously through the OSP portal, including evidence, to aid investigations without procedural shortcuts.
Points of Caution
- Avoid Rushing Justice: Pressuring institutions like OSP can lead to procedural errors, risking case dismissals.
- Combat Misinformation: Question claims of “delays” without context; procedural steps like summons issuance are standard.
- Respect Jurisdiction: International service involves diplomacy and treaties, extending timelines beyond domestic cases.
- Political Neutrality: OSP operates independently; partisan interpretations undermine anti-corruption efforts.
Comparison
OSP Ofori-Atta Case vs. Other Ghana Corruption Probes
Similar to the OSP’s handling of cases against former Auditor-General Daniel Domelovo or ECG officials, the Ofori-Atta matter prioritizes evidence gathering and presence assurance. In the 2023 Airbus scandal involving politicians, international cooperation via Interpol was key, mirroring the Red Notice here.
Domestic vs. International Service
Domestic servings, as in the prosecution of former Savannah Regional Minister Adam Mutawakilu, occur swiftly within Ghana. International cases like Ofori-Atta’s require summons under the Mutual Legal Assistance Act, 2010 (Act 807), often taking weeks due to foreign state involvement.
Legal Implications
The OSP’s adherence to procedure in the Ken Ofori-Atta charges upholds constitutional rights under Article 19 of Ghana’s 1992 Constitution, ensuring fair hearings. Non-compliance could invite appeals, stays, or acquittals on technicalities, as seen in past cases like Republic v. Watson (2015). The Interpol Red Notice invokes the Extradition Act, 1982 (PNDCL 57), potentially leading to Ofori-Atta’s return for trial.
Failure to personally serve charges violates Section 38 of Act 30, rendering proceedings voidable. This rigor protects against abuse while advancing accountability in public finance scandals.
Conclusion
The OSP’s clarification on Ken Ofori-Atta charges reinforces Ghana’s commitment to rule-based anti-corruption enforcement. By following due process—filing charges, seeking summons, and deploying Interpol tools—the OSP counters misinformation and builds lasting credibility. Public understanding of these OSP procedures fosters patience and support for transparent justice, essential for eradicating corruption in Ghana.
As investigations progress, staying informed through verified channels will clarify outcomes in this pivotal case.
FAQ
What are the OSP Ofori-Atta charges about?
The charges relate to alleged financial misconduct during Ofori-Atta’s tenure as Finance Minister, under OSP investigation per Act 959.
Why can’t lawyers receive charges for Ofori-Atta?
Ghanaian criminal procedure (Act 30) requires personal service on the accused to ensure direct knowledge and rights protection.
What is an Interpol Red Notice in this context?
It’s a global alert requesting provisional arrest for extradition, used here after Ofori-Atta’s international travel despite investigation summons.
How long do international summons take?
Timelines vary by country cooperation, often 2-6 weeks under mutual assistance treaties.
Does public pressure influence OSP decisions?
No; OSP prioritizes law over impatience, as stated by Samuel Darko.
Leave a comment