OSP vs Ofori-Atta
In response to recent remarks made by former NPP General Secretary Kwabena Agyepong, who described the ongoing investigation involving former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta as a “dangerous cycle of retribution and vengeance,” it is necessary to examine the facts and procedures of the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) to determine whether his assertions hold up under legal and constitutional scrutiny. Spoiler: they don’t.
1. The OSP Is Acting Within Its Legal Mandate – Not as a Political Tool
Kwabena Agyepong implies that the OSP’s declaration of Ken Ofori-Atta as a wanted fugitive resembles political persecution rather than legitimate law enforcement. However, this assumption ignores the legal foundation of the OSP’s operations.
The Office of the Special Prosecutor was established under the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959), as an independent anti-corruption institution. It is not under the control of the Executive and has full authority to:
Investigate and prosecute cases involving corruption and corruption-related offences involving public officers and politically exposed persons.
Take necessary measures to compel cooperation from suspects under criminal investigation.
Declaring someone a fugitive is not an act of political vengeance. It is legally supported under Ghana’s Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30), Section 72, which empowers prosecutors to apply for warrants and declare individuals wanted if they fail to appear before investigative authorities after repeated summons.
2. Ken Ofori-Atta Refused to Comply with Repeated Lawful Requests
The OSP’s Special Prosecutor, Kissi Agyebeng, stated clearly at the June 2, 2025, press conference that Mr. Ofori-Atta was repeatedly invited to appear in person – not once, not twice, but multiple times. Despite these attempts, Ofori-Atta failed to present himself physically and instead insisted on a virtual engagement.
But the law does not permit suspects to dictate the terms of an investigation. As Agyebeng rightly stated:
“A suspect in a criminal investigation does not dictate how the investigative body conducts its investigations.”
By refusing to appear physically, Ofori-Atta violated a lawful directive – a clear obstruction of justice. This conduct alone justifies the issuance of a declaration of “wanted” status under criminal procedure law.
3. Precedent and Global Standards Justify Public Declarations
In high-profile corruption investigations globally, it is common practice to issue public notices when individuals deliberately evade investigative authorities. The U.S. Department of Justice, the UK’s Serious Fraud Office, and South Africa’s Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (Hawks) have all issued public “wanted” statements in similar cases when suspects ignored formal requests to appear.
Therefore, the OSP’s actions are not extraordinary or politically motivated – they follow international norms of due process in anti-corruption work.
4. This Is Not a “Cycle of Vengeance”—It’s Institutional Accountability
Mr. Agyepong frames the situation as a “cycle of retribution,” but this assumes that investigations of political figures are inherently vindictive. That is a dangerous presumption. Accountability must not be confused with vengeance.
Ken Ofori-Atta served as Ghana’s Finance Minister for over 7 years, overseeing billions in public funds and multiple controversial financial decisions, including:
The Agyapa Royalties deal, which was criticized by civil society groups for lack of transparency.
The country’s debt exchange program, which impacted local bondholders and pensioners.
Questions raised about conflict of interest in financial arrangements involving Databank, a company he co-founded.
Given these factors, the Special Prosecutor has compelling public interest reasons to probe financial misconduct. Ignoring these suspicions for fear of being labeled “political” would set a dangerous precedent of impunity for public officials.
5. OSP Is Not Declaring Guilt—It’s Demanding Cooperation
Contrary to Agyepong’s claim that the OSP is acting as judge and jury by “declaring someone a fugitive,” it’s important to clarify:
A declaration of someone as a “fugitive” is not a judgment of guilt.
It is a procedural response to the failure to cooperate with a lawful investigation. The OSP has not tried, convicted, or sentenced Ofori-Atta. It is merely asking him to fulfill a basic legal obligation: appear and respond to questions.
If he has nothing to hide, he should comply—just as any citizen would be required to do.
Conclusion: The Danger Is Not in the Investigation—It’s in Undermining Institutions
Kwabena Agyepong’s statements, while perhaps well-intentioned, reflect a deep misunderstanding of how legal systems function in democratic societies. The real danger lies not in the OSP doing its job, but in a political elite using rhetoric of persecution to escape accountability.
Rather than framing legitimate investigations as “vengeance,” Ghana must support the independence of its anti-corruption institutions. Public officials—past and present—should lead by example and cooperate fully with lawful investigations.
That is how trust in public institutions is built—not by shielding powerful figures from the rule of law.
Read this:
20 Most Successful Independent Music Artists
How to Write Professional Music Opinions and Reviews: The Ultimate Guide
A Comprehensive Guide To SSIS 469
100 Easy General Knowledge Questions and Answers In English [2025 Edition]
How to Draw a NIKE LOGO: 7 Easy Steps
How to Download Videos from Facebook in 2025?
liveeamoment. org: The Friendly Way To Embrace Mindfulness
https://audiomack.com/halmblogmusicgh
