What’s Ofori-Atta’s crime for declining invitation to investigation? – Egyapa Mercer – Life Pulse Daily

Introduction

In a high-profile case that has captured national attention, former Sekondi-Takoradi Member of Parliament and legal expert Andrew Egyapa Mercer has publicly defended former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta for declining an invitation to voluntarily attend an investigation. The debate centers on a fundamental question: What crime, if any, has Ken Ofori-Atta committed by choosing not to cooperate with investigators?

Mercer’s comments, made during a recent appearance on PleasureNews’ Newsfile program, have reignited discussions about legal rights, public expectations, and the rule of law in Ghana. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of Mercer’s legal arguments, the constitutional context, and the broader implications for accountability and governance.

Key Points

Background

The Investigation Context

The investigation in question relates to alleged financial irregularities during Ken Ofori-Atta’s tenure as Finance Minister of Ghana. Various agencies, including the Economic and Organized Crime Office (EOCO), have been examining transactions and decisions made under his supervision. While specific allegations have not been fully detailed in public statements, the mere mention of an investigation has generated significant media coverage and public scrutiny.

Ken Ofori-Atta’s Position

Ken Ofori-Atta, who served as Finance Minister from 2017 to 2024, is a prominent figure in Ghanaian politics and economics. His tenure was marked by significant fiscal reforms, including tax policy adjustments and debt management strategies. The current investigation places him at the center of a political and legal controversy, raising questions about accountability at the highest levels of government.

Andrew Egyapa Mercer’s Legal Credentials

Andrew Egyapa Mercer, the commentator in question, is a trained lawyer and former Member of Parliament for Sekondi. He has served as a legal advisor to several high-profile individuals and has experience navigating complex legal and political landscapes. His perspective carries weight due to his dual expertise in law and governance.

Analysis

Legal Foundations of the Right to Silence

Mercer’s primary argument rests on a fundamental principle of criminal law: the right to remain silent. In Ghana, this right is protected under Article 19(1) of the 1992 Constitution, which states that “a person shall not be compelled to testify against himself or herself.”

This constitutional protection is not unique to Ghana; it is a cornerstone of fair trial standards recognized by international human rights frameworks, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Ghana is a state party.

Mercer emphasized this point by asking: “If he elects not to do this, what law has he broken?” The rhetorical nature of the question underscores his position that voluntary cooperation is not a legal requirement.

The Burden of Proof

Another critical aspect of Mercer’s argument is the principle of presumption of innocence and the burden of proof. In any criminal proceeding, the prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The accused is not obligated to assist in building a case against themselves.

Mercer stated: “If Mr. Ofori-Atta elects, given the whole public brouhaha that is happening, I don’t want to subject myself to this process, if they suspect they have evidence against me, let them go ahead and get their conviction.”

This statement reflects a strategic understanding of the legal process. By refusing to voluntarily participate, Ofori-Atta avoids providing statements that could potentially be used against him, while forcing the investigating agency to rely on independent evidence.

Voluntary vs. Compulsory Cooperation

Mercer clarified a crucial distinction between voluntary and compulsory cooperation. While individuals may be invited to assist with investigations, they can only be compelled to appear through a formal legal process, such as a subpoena or court order.

He posed a direct question to illustrate this: “So if he comes and goes to EOCO or whatever, special prosecutor, and is going to sit there and fold his hands, they ask him questions, I may not answer. Can anyone compel him to answer?”

The answer, under current Ghanaian law, is generally no—unless he is formally charged and the questioning occurs within a judicial framework that overrides the right to silence.

Public Perception and Political Pressure

Mercer also addressed the issue of public persecution and what he described as a “public trial.” He argued that the intense media scrutiny and public pressure surrounding the case could undermine the integrity of the legal process.

“The focus should be on the state’s responsibility to prove its case through evidence, not on coercing cooperation,” Mercer asserted. This statement highlights a growing concern in many democracies where public opinion can influence legal proceedings before they are concluded.

Historical Precedents

Mercer’s defense of Ofori-Atta is not without precedent. In numerous high-profile cases around the world, individuals have exercised their right to remain silent or decline voluntary questioning. In some instances, this strategy has led to the collapse of cases due to insufficient evidence.

Conversely, in other cases, voluntary statements have been used to secure convictions. Mercer’s advice aligns with standard legal practice: when under investigation, silence is often the safest legal strategy.

Practical Advice

For Individuals Under Investigation

If you are ever invited to assist with a police or state investigation in Ghana, consider the following:

1. Consult a Lawyer: Always seek legal advice before deciding whether to cooperate.
2. Understand Your Rights: You have the right to remain silent and cannot be forced to incriminate yourself.
3. Cooperation is Voluntary: Unless you are formally charged or served with a court order, participation is not mandatory.
4. Document Everything: Keep records of all communications with investigators.
5. Avoid Public Statements: Public comments can be used against you in legal proceedings.

For the Public

When public figures are under investigation:

1. Presume Innocence: Avoid jumping to conclusions before legal processes are complete.
2. Respect Due Process: The legal system is designed to protect everyone, including the accused.
3. Seek Verified Information: Rely on official statements and credible sources, not social media rumors.
4. Support Institutional Integrity: Encourage investigations that are thorough, fair, and based on evidence.

FAQ

Conclusion

Andrew Egyapa Mercer’s defense of Ken Ofori-Atta’s decision to decline an invitation to investigation is grounded in well-established legal principles. The right to remain silent, the presumption of innocence, and the burden of proof on the prosecution are cornerstones of a fair legal system.

While the public may demand immediate accountability, especially from high-profile figures, the rule of law requires patience and adherence to due process. Mercer’s comments serve as a timely reminder that legal rights must be protected, even when inconvenient or unpopular.

As the investigation continues, it will be essential for all parties—investigators, the accused, the media, and the public—to respect the integrity of the legal process. Only through evidence-based proceedings can justice be truly served.