A transparent blot on his profession – Adawudu slams Special Prosecutor over Kpebu arrest – Life Pulse Daily

Introduction: Understanding the Controversy Surrounding the OSP and Kpebu Arrest

In a recent development that has sparked debate within Ghana’s legal and political landscape, private felony practitioner Victor Adawudu has publicly criticized the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) over the arrest of activist Martin Kpebu. Adawudu’s remarks, made during an appearance on Joy News’ PM Express, highlight concerns about the OSP’s alleged misuse of power and procedural irregularities in handling Kpebu’s case. This article delves into the key issues raised by Adawudu, analyzes the implications of the arrest, and examines the broader questions about accountability and professional conduct in Ghana’s judicial system.

Analysis: Signaling a Loss of Trust in the OSP

Adawudu’s Critique of Unconstitutional Practices

Victor Adawudu, a legal expert with a focus on constitutional law, expressed deep skepticism about the OSP’s actions in the Kpebu case. He argued that the arrest violated constitutional principles, particularly regarding due process and the separation of powers. According to Adawudu, the circumstances surrounding Kpebu’s detention—being charged for “obstructing officers” without clear evidence of legal authority—revealed a troubling pattern: “It’s a transparent blot on his profession.”

Adawudu emphasized that the OSP’s failure to clarify its jurisdiction over the arrest undermines its credibility. He questioned why OSP officers could act independently of the Special Prosecutor’s oversight, particularly in confronting individuals on professional grounds. This lack of transparency, he claims, opens the door to abuses of power, especially against public figures like Kpebu, who is known for his advocacy work.

Procedural Flaws and Public Perception

Central to Adawudu’s argument is the procedural inconsistency in Kpebu’s arrest. Protests over the use of the OSP Act to detain someone who allegedly reported verbal harassment by off-duty police officers underscored the disconnect between legal formalities and practical fairness. Adawudu pointed out that the OSP’s public relations misstep—publicly distancing itself from the arrest while failing to provide clarity—has fueled public suspicion that the institution prioritizes political interests over judicial objectivity.

Summary: Key Issues in the OSP-Kpebu Case

The arrest and detention of Martin Kpebu, a respected human rights activist, have become a flashpoint for debates about judicial integrity. Adawudu’s sharp criticism centers on three core issues:

1. Unauthorized Use of Power: The OSP’s alleged overreach in involving law enforcement without the Special Prosecutor’s direct order.
2. Constitutional Concerns: Potential violations of Kpebu’s rights to due process and freedom from arbitrary detention.
3. Reputational Damage: The OSP’s credibility is at risk of eroding if such incidents persist unchecked.

This case highlights the delicate balance between combating corruption and upholding legal fairness in Ghana’s evolving legal framework.

Key Points: Adawudu’s Arguments at a Glance

1. The Special Prosecutor’s Authority Must Be Clearly Defined

Adawudu stressed that the OSP’s mandate must include strict guidelines to prevent arbitrary arrests. He warned that vague interpretations of authority could lead to selective targeting of critics or activists under the guise of anti-corruption efforts.

2. Police Compliance with Judicial Oversight

He criticized the police for acting beyond their legal mandate in detaining Kpebu, stating that their involvement in OSP matters without clear authorization undermines the rule of law.

3. Public Trust as the Cornerstone of Justice

The OSP’s core mission—to lead anti-corruption efforts—relies on public confidence. Adawudu argues that mishandling high-profile cases like Kpebu’s will only entrench cynicism about institutional impartiality.

Practical Advice: Strengthening Accountability Mechanisms

Reforming the OSP’s Oversight Structure

Adawudu recommended enacting legislation that mandates judicial review of all OSP arrests. This would ensure that any allegations of wrongdoing are vetted by an independent court before charges are filed.

Enhancing Transparency in Police-Judicial Collaboration

He urged stricter protocols for when police officers engage with OSP cases, including requiring official clearance from the Special Prosecutor for arrests made under the observation of OSP personnel.

Supporting Activists’ Rights to Legal Recourse

Adawudu called for protecting whistleblowers and activists who engage with OSP investigators, advocating for clearer legal frameworks to prevent retaliation against marginalized voices.

Points of Caution: Potential Risks and Challenges

While Adawudu’s critique is valid, addressing the OSP’s challenges comes with risks:

1. Resistance to Reform: Powerful actors may resist curbs on OSP authority, fearing accountability.
2. Setting a Precedent: Critics could weaponize similar arguments to discredit future investigations, regardless of merit.
3. Resource Constraints: Implementing oversight mechanisms may require funding and expertise the OSP currently lacks.

Balancing accountability with operational efficiency remains a delicate task for Ghana’s authorities.

Comparison: Lessons from International Anti-Corruption Bodies

Similar tensions between oversight bodies and law enforcement have emerged globally. For instance, Lithuania’s Special Investigation Service (SIS) faced scrutiny in 2014 after accusations of targeting political opponents. Like the OSP, the SIS had to introduce stricter audit requirements to rebuild public trust. Comparatively, Ghana’s OSP could adopt practices such as:

• Publishing annual reports on case outcomes and decision margins.
• Establishing a civilian advisory board to review contentious cases.
• Mandating body camera use during operations involving high-profile figures.

Such measures would align the OSP with global best practices while retaining its anti-corruption focus.

Legal Implications: Could the OSP Face Accountability?

Legally, Adawudu’s remarks raise questions about whether the OSP’s actions in the Kpebu case constitute:

• Plenary Jurisdiction Misuse: If officers acted outside the OSP Act’s scope, they may have violated constitutional protections against arbitrary detention.
• Abuse of Office: If the Special Prosecutor independently sanctioned the arrest without due cause, it could lead to disciplinary proceedings under Section 18 of the OSP Act.
• Possible Civil Liability: Kpebu may pursue claims of false imprisonment or negligent misconduct against the OSP if his rights were violated.

However, prosecuting the OSP or its officials would require concrete evidence of intentional misconduct, a high bar that may deter swift action.

Conclusion: Rebuilding Trust Through Reforms

The Kpebu arrest has laid bare critical flaws in Ghana’s anti-corruption apparatus. Adawudu’s critique underscores the urgent need for structural reforms to ensure the OSP operates with transparency and restraint. Without such changes, public disillusionment may outweigh the agency’s potential to combat systemic graft.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What is the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP)?

The OSP is Ghana’s independent anti-corruption agency, mandated to investigate high-level officials suspected of graft. Established in 2015, its director is appointed by the President with Parliament’s consent.

Who is Martin Kpebu?

Kpebu is a renowned social justice advocate and former board member of Norsaaco Ghana, a youth-focused nonprofit. He was arrested on December 3, 2025, after allegedly confronting a police officer he accused of sexual harassment.

Can the OSP operate independently of the judiciary?

The OSP is designed to function autonomously, but its arrest powers remain controversial. Critics argue that its authority should be limited to investigations, not law enforcement interventions.