Ayawaso East Primary: OSP Has No Mandate to Probe Alleged Vote Purchasing – Haruna Mohammed

Introduction

The recent Ayawaso East parliamentary primary has sparked controversy after allegations of vote buying surfaced, prompting the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) to announce an investigation. However, Haruna Mohammed, Deputy General Secretary of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), has strongly contested the OSP’s authority to probe this matter. This article examines the legal and political dimensions of this dispute, the OSP’s mandate, and the broader implications for Ghana’s electoral integrity.

Key Points

Background

The Ayawaso East parliamentary primary, held within the New Patriotic Party (NPP), became the center of attention after reports emerged alleging that some candidates engaged in vote buying to influence the outcome. In response, the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) declared its intention to investigate these allegations, citing concerns over electoral integrity and corruption.

The OSP, established under the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959), is tasked with combating corruption in public offices and state-related activities. Its mandate includes investigating and prosecuting corruption and corruption-related offenses involving public officers and politically exposed persons.

However, Haruna Mohammed, a senior NPP official, has challenged the OSP’s involvement, asserting that the agency’s legal framework does not extend to private political party elections or non-public individuals.

Analysis

The OSP’s Legal Mandate

The OSP’s authority is explicitly defined by law. According to the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017, the OSP is empowered to investigate and prosecute corruption offenses involving:

– Public officers
– Politically exposed persons
– Private individuals or entities in transactions with the state

Critically, the Act does not grant the OSP jurisdiction over internal party elections or private individuals who do not hold public office or engage in state-related transactions.

Haruna Mohammed’s Argument

Haruna Mohammed’s position rests on a strict interpretation of the OSP’s mandate. He contends that:

1. **No Public Office Holders Involved**: None of the NPP members who contested in the Ayawaso East primary hold public office.
2. **Private Citizens**: The candidates are private individuals, not state actors.
3. **Internal Party Matter**: The primary is an internal party affair, not a state-related activity.

Mohammed further criticized the OSP’s statement as “populist” and “legally improper,” arguing that the agency is overstepping its bounds and engaging in “imperial tactics” without delivering tangible results in its core mandate.

Legal and Political Implications

This dispute highlights several important issues:

– **Scope of Anti-Corruption Agencies**: The controversy underscores the need for clarity on the jurisdiction of anti-corruption bodies, especially when allegations involve political parties.
– **Internal Party Democracy**: It raises questions about the balance between protecting internal democratic processes and ensuring electoral integrity.
– **Public Trust**: The OSP’s involvement, even if legally questionable, may reflect public demand for accountability in all electoral processes, including party primaries.

Practical Advice

For political parties and anti-corruption agencies, this situation offers several lessons:

1. **Clarify Legal Boundaries**: Political parties should clearly define the limits of external oversight in their internal processes.
2. **Strengthen Internal Mechanisms**: Parties should establish robust internal mechanisms to address allegations of misconduct, reducing reliance on external agencies.
3. **Public Communication**: Both parties and agencies must communicate transparently about their roles and limitations to avoid confusion and maintain public trust.

FAQ

Conclusion

The controversy surrounding the OSP’s intended probe into the Ayawaso East NPP primary highlights the complexities of defining the boundaries of anti-corruption agencies in Ghana. While the OSP’s involvement may reflect a desire for accountability, Haruna Mohammed’s argument underscores the importance of adhering to legal mandates and respecting the autonomy of internal party processes. Moving forward, clarity on the roles and limitations of such agencies will be crucial in maintaining both the rule of law and public trust in Ghana’s democratic institutions.