Scrap it – Sam Okudzeto says Special Prosecutor’s workplace has completed not anything – Life Pulse Daily

Introduction

In a high-profile critique that has reignited debate over anti-corruption institutions in Ghana, former Ghana Bar Association President Sam Okudzeto has called for the immediate scrapping of the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP). Speaking on Joy News’ PM Express on December 8, 2025, Okudzeto argued that the OSP has not delivered meaningful results and questioned the very rationale behind its creation. His remarks come amid growing public scrutiny of the agency’s performance, with critics pointing to low conviction numbers and a lack of visible impact on systemic corruption.

This article analyzes Okudzeto’s position, provides context on the OSP’s mandate and record, and examines the broader policy implications for Ghana’s anti-corruption strategy. By focusing on verifiable facts, best practices, and practical recommendations, we aim to offer a balanced and SEO-optimized overview that helps readers understand whether the OSP should be reformed, strengthened, or disbanded.

Key Points

Background

Creation of the Office of the Special Prosecutor

The OSP was established in 2017 under the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959). Its mandate is to investigate and prosecute corruption and corruption-related offenses, as well as to confiscate proceeds of corruption. The OSP was created as an independent agency to complement the work of the Attorney General’s Department, the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), and the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ).

The OSP officially began operations in 2018 under its first Special Prosecutor, Martin Amidu. Amidu resigned in 2021 after a court ruling questioned the legality of his reappointment, citing constitutional concerns. The OSP has since been led by acting officials, including Kissinger Gyide and later David Asante-Apeatu.

Legal Framework and Mandate

The OSP Act grants the agency powers to:

• Investigate corruption and related offenses.
• Prosecute offenders independently or in collaboration with the DPP.
• Request asset declarations from public officials.
• Freeze and seize assets suspected to be proceeds of corruption.
• Provide witness protection and cooperate with international bodies.

Despite these powers, the OSP’s performance has drawn criticism for low conviction rates and a lack of high-profile cases.

Analysis

Okudzeto’s Core Arguments

1. Duplication of Functions

Okudzeto’s central claim is that the OSP duplicates the work of the Attorney General’s Department, specifically the DPP, which already has the authority to prosecute corruption. He points out that the DPP routinely handles corruption-related cases and that creating a separate agency leads to inefficiency and confusion.

Fact Check: The DPP’s mandate includes prosecuting all criminal offenses, including bribery and corruption under the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29) and the Public Procurement Act, 2003 (Act 663). However, the OSP was designed to focus exclusively on grand corruption and complex financial crimes, with additional powers to confiscate assets and request declarations.

2. Lack of Visible Impact

Okudzeto argues that corruption remains “brazen” and widespread, suggesting the OSP has failed to curb it. He cites everyday experiences of bribery in public institutions as evidence.

Fact Check: Measuring corruption reduction is complex. While anecdotal reports of bribery persist, the OSP’s annual reports show hundreds of investigations and dozens of prosecutions. However, conviction rates remain low due to challenges such as witness intimidation, weak evidence, and lengthy court processes. According to the OSP’s 2023 annual report, it secured 18 convictions out of 62 cases filed that year.

3. Institutional Inefficiency

Okudzeto warns that creating a new institution around a single individual is “dangerous.” He suggests that training and strengthening existing prosecutors would be more effective.

Fact Check: Institutional capacity building is widely recognized as a pillar of sustainable anti-corruption reform. International best practices, such as those from the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), emphasize coordination among agencies, capacity development, and clear mandates to avoid overlap.

International Comparisons

Okudzeto referenced the UK’s Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to argue that a specialized anti-corruption role can exist within existing structures. However, many countries have created independent anti-corruption bodies to address systemic issues where traditional prosecutors face political interference or lack expertise.

Examples include:

• Malaysia’s Independent Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).
• Botswana’s Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crime (DCEC).
• Uganda’s Inspectorate of Government.

These agencies operate alongside traditional prosecutorial bodies but focus specifically on corruption. Their success varies, but they often benefit from strong legal mandates, political independence, and public support.

The Role of the Attorney General vs. the OSP

Okudzeto conflates the roles of the Attorney General (AG), the DPP, and the OSP. In Ghana’s system:

• The AG is the chief legal advisor to government.
• The DPP, under the AG, has independent authority to prosecute criminal cases.
• The OSP is an independent agency focused on corruption, with powers to investigate and prosecute.

While there is some functional overlap, the OSP was intended to handle complex cases that may involve international cooperation, asset recovery, and high-level officials.

Public Perception and Accountability

Public trust in the OSP has been affected by:

• High-profile resignations (e.g., Martin Amidu).
• Perceived lack of action on major corruption allegations.
• Delays in prosecutions and acquittals due to procedural issues.

Transparency advocates argue that the OSP needs to improve communication about its activities and outcomes to maintain public confidence.

Practical Advice

For Policymakers

1. Conduct an Independent Review: Commission a transparent, third-party evaluation of the OSP’s performance, including cost-effectiveness, conviction rates, and impact on corruption perceptions.
2. Strengthen Coordination: Establish a formal inter-agency task force linking the OSP, EOCO, CHRAJ, DPP, and the Police to avoid duplication and improve information sharing.
3. Enhance Capacity: Invest in training, forensic accounting, digital evidence handling, and witness protection for all anti-corruption prosecutors.
4. Clarify Mandates: Amend the OSP Act to clearly define jurisdiction and referral mechanisms to prevent turf wars.
5. Increase Transparency: Require the OSP to publish quarterly reports with anonymized case summaries, outcomes, and lessons learned.

For Civil Society and Media

1. Monitor the OSP’s budget and expenditures for efficiency.
2. Promote public education on how to report corruption and engage with anti-corruption agencies.
3. Advocate for legal reforms that protect whistleblowers and streamline prosecutions.
4. Encourage dialogue between the OSP, bar associations, and academic institutions.

For the Public

1. Use official channels (OSP website, toll-free lines) to report suspected corruption with evidence.
2. Support transparency initiatives and demand accountability from all institutions.
3. Participate in public forums and surveys on corruption to shape policy.

FAQ

Conclusion

Sam Okudzeto’s call to scrap the OSP reflects broader frustrations with the pace of anti-corruption progress in Ghana. While his concerns about duplication and inefficiency are valid, the solution may not be abolition but reform. The OSP was created with a clear mandate to tackle grand corruption, but its impact has been limited by systemic challenges.

Rather than dismantling the agency, policymakers should focus on strengthening its independence, improving coordination with existing bodies, and enhancing transparency. Investing in capacity building for all prosecutors—whether in the DPP’s office or the OSP—will yield better long-term results than eliminating a specialized institution.

Ghana’s fight against corruption requires a multi-agency, multi-stakeholder approach. The debate over the OSP’s future should be guided by evidence, not emotion, and should prioritize sustainable reforms that deliver tangible results for citizens.