The anti-corruption organisation is also seeking an investigation into private interests allegedly registered or asserted over the lands on which the two facilities are located.

The petition follows an investigative documentary by Corruption Watch titled “Publicly Funded, Privately Controlled! The Multi-Million-Cedi Astroturf Exposé”, which examined the financing, construction, ownership and management of the two facilities.

According to the organisation, more than GH¢17 million in public funds was used in the construction of the two facilities.

At Hohoe, Corruption Watch said its investigation found that the Hohoe Municipal Assembly contracted Wembley Sports Construction Company Limited to construct the facility with substantial funding from state institutions.

It, however, said the facility was not formally handed over to the Assembly and had instead been under the control and/or management of persons associated with former Hohoe MP and Minister, John Peter Amewu.

The organisation further alleged that the land on which the Hohoe facility is located had been registered in the name of Thomas Amewu, the brother of Mr Amewu.

Corruption Watch said the Hohoe Municipal Assembly had publicly stated that it considers the facility to be state property and intends to demand its handover.

At Agogo, the organisation said the Sports and Cultural Complex was fully funded by Ghana National Gas Company Limited and constructed by Wembley Sports Construction Company Limited.

It said Owusu Bempah, then a senior Ghana Gas official, had asserted ownership and/or control over the facility and claimed an interest in the underlying land.

The facility, which was commissioned in 2022, was reportedly privately managed while its ownership was being contested until 2024, when the Asante Akim North Municipal Assembly took custody following a directive from Ghana Gas.

Corruption Watch said Mr Bempah continues to assert ownership of the land on which the facility is situated.

The organisation is therefore asking the Attorney-General to review contracts, payment and completion records, Assembly reports, correspondence, land records and other documents relating to the financing, construction, ownership and management of both facilities.

It also wants the Attorney-General to determine the lawful ownership and custody of the facilities and establish the legal basis for any control or management outside the respective Municipal Assemblies.

Corruption Watch is further calling for investigations into the chain of title and circumstances surrounding the registration, acquisition or assertion of private interests in the lands, including the interests associated with Thomas Amewu in Hohoe and Owusu Bempah in Agogo.

The organisation wants authorities to establish what land-title due diligence was conducted before public funds were committed to the projects and what safeguards were put in place to protect the public investment.

It is also asking the Attorney-General to determine whether revenues were generated from either facility while they were outside the control of the respective Assemblies, who collected such revenues and whether any amounts should be accounted for and recovered for the benefit of the Assemblies or the State.

Corruption Watch said where evidence points to procurement or financial irregularities, corruption, conflict of interest, abuse of office or other suspected wrongdoing, the relevant matters should be referred to the appropriate investigative, regulatory or prosecutorial institutions.

It has also called for investigations into the use of Corporate Social Responsibility funds of state-owned enterprises to finance public infrastructure for personal benefit, including political campaign purposes.

Corruption Watch stressed that publicly funded infrastructure should not, without lawful authority and transparent arrangements, migrate into private ownership or control.

It is therefore asking the Attorney-General to establish the complete legal position regarding the two facilities and their underlying lands and take appropriate action to protect the public interest.

Read the statement below:

READ ALSO:

We are reforming systems, fighting corruption and improving use of public funds – Mahama

One Constituency, one Astroturf Project: Corruption Watch uncovers alleged procurement breaches

The State informed the court on Wednesday, August 12, that it had filed a notice of withdrawal on August 10, effectively bringing the application before the Court of Appeal to an end.

The Attorney-General had earlier asked the court to suspend the effect of the acquittal pending the determination of a further appeal.

The State argued that allowing the acquittal to take immediate effect could create an opportunity for Mrs Tamakloe-Attionu to leave the jurisdiction, potentially making it difficult to pursue the appeal.

Lawyers for the former MASLOC CEO, however, raised concerns about the manner in which the application was withdrawn.

They argued that the Attorney-General should have sought the court’s permission before filing the notice of withdrawal, particularly because Wednesday had already been fixed for the court to deliver its ruling on the application.

Speaking to the media after proceedings, counsel for Mrs Tamakloe-Attionu, Sidney Antonio, said the defence believed the proper procedure was for the Attorney-General to seek leave of the court before withdrawing the application.

“Today’s date was given by the court for the court to deliver its ruling, and we were just served yesterday with a notice of withdrawal. We believe the proper thing should have been for the Attorney-General to have sought leave of the court before going ahead and withdrawing because today’s business was for delivering of ruling and that should have gone on today,” he said.

Mr Antonio was also asked about reports that the Attorney-General had filed a similar application at the Supreme Court after withdrawing the one before the Court of Appeal.

He said the defence had not been formally served with any such application.

“We have not been served formally with any such motion, but as you have heard, we have also heard about it,” he said.

The development follows the Court of Appeal’s decision in July 2026 to overturn the 10-year prison sentence imposed on Mrs Tamakloe-Attionu by the Accra High Court in April 2024.

The appellate court acquitted and discharged her after concluding that the prosecution had failed to prove its case.

Mrs Tamakloe-Attionu had been convicted by the High Court on 78 counts, including stealing, causing financial loss to the state and money laundering, and sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment with hard labour.

The Attorney-General subsequently sought to stay the effect of the acquittal while pursuing a further appeal.

Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Dr Dominic Ayine, announced the proposal on Thursday, July 30, while presenting government’s White Paper on the recommendations of the Constitutional Review Committee (CRC).

Under the proposed reforms, Article 88 of the 1992 Constitution will be amended to remove the requirement for the Attorney-General to be appointed as a Minister of State.

“The government proposes that Article 88 be amended to remove the requirement that the Attorney-General be a minister of state,” Dr Ayine said.

A separate Minister of Justice portfolio will be created to oversee the justice and legal sector, while the Attorney-General will remain the Republic’s principal legal adviser and continue to exercise the state’s prosecutorial authority.

“The Attorney-General will remain the principal legal adviser of the Republic and the repository of the prosecutorial authority of the state but will cease to be a minister of state and a member of Cabinet,” he stated.

Dr Ayine explained that the reform is intended to strengthen the independence of the Attorney-General’s office by reducing its direct connection with the executive.

To further safeguard the office, the government has proposed granting the Attorney-General the same terms and conditions of service as a Justice of the Supreme Court.

“To guarantee the prosecutorial independence of the office, a new clause will be inserted in Article 88 to give the Attorney-General the same terms and conditions of service as a Justice of the Supreme Court,” he said.

He added that future Attorneys-General would enjoy stronger security of tenure, with their removal subject to the same constitutional procedure applicable to Supreme Court justices.

“Whoever is appointed Attorney-General after these amendments come into effect, if you want to remove that person, you have to go through the procedure enumerated under Article 146 of the Constitution,” he explained.

Article 146 provides a process for the removal of superior court judges, including the requirement for a petition and the determination of a prima facie case before further action can be taken.

Dr Ayine described the proposal as one of the most significant institutional reforms contained in the White Paper, saying it would transform the legal structure of the executive.

“This is a significant restructuring of the legal architecture of the executive and I believe history will judge it kindly,” he said.

Meanwhile, the government has also accepted, in principle, the Constitutional Review Committee’s recommendation to establish an independent anti-corruption body.

However, Dr Ayine said the body would not be created through a constitutional amendment. Instead, government intends to establish a Public Ethics Commission through the Conduct of Public Officers Bill currently before Parliament.

According to him, the proposed commission will have powers to investigate corruption and conflict-of-interest issues involving public office holders and, in certain cases, prosecute offences independently of executive control.

NPP to announce next steps after Sedina Tamakloe-Attionu’s acquittal

DVLA CEO cuts sod for construction of office at Bechem

The order was issued on Wednesday, July 29, 2026, by Justice Francis A. Achibonga after counsel for the first accused, Richard Gyambiby, filed an application seeking full disclosure of all relevant materials.

Lawyers for the accused argued that withholding relevant documents would prejudice their client’s ability to prepare an adequate defence and infringe on his constitutional right to a fair trial.

In its ruling, the court held that the prosecution is under a legal obligation to disclose any documents relevant to the charges if such materials are in the possession or control of the Attorney-General, officers of the Attorney-General’s Department or investigators handling the case.

Justice Achibonga consequently directed the Attorney-General to make all relevant documents available to the first accused.

Mr Abdul-Wahab Aludiba is facing multiple charges arising from his tenure as NAFCO Chief Executive Officer, including stealing, defrauding by false pretences, causing financial loss to the state and money laundering.

The court’s decision reaffirms the principle that prosecutors have a continuing duty to disclose material evidence relevant to a criminal trial, irrespective of whether it supports or weakens the prosecution’s case, in order to guarantee a fair hearing.

The case has been adjourned to Thursday, July 30, 2026, when the court is expected to hear an application by the first accused seeking a stay of proceedings pending the outcome of an appeal.

READ ALSO:

Court remands two suspects in Immigration Officer murder case as prosecution awaits DNA report

Supreme Court ruling exposes need for political party funding reforms – NPP

The briefing, scheduled for 1:00 p.m., is expected to outline the government’s response to the committee’s recommendations as part of ongoing efforts to review and strengthen Ghana’s constitutional framework.

The announcement was made by the Minister for Government Communications, Felix Kwakye Ofosu, in a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Wednesday, July 29.

According to Mr Kwakye Ofosu, the Constitution Review Committee’s full report, together with the Government’s Position Paper, will be published shortly after the briefing, allowing the public and key stakeholders to examine both the committee’s recommendations and the government’s official response.

The publication of the documents is expected to provide greater insight into the government’s stance on the proposed constitutional reforms and the next steps in the constitutional review process.

The Constitution Review Committee was tasked with examining proposals for amendments to Ghana’s 1992 Constitution and making recommendations aimed at strengthening the country’s democratic governance, institutions and constitutional order.

In a petition dated July 17, 2026, Abdul-Wahab accused the Attorney-General’s office, the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) and the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) of repeatedly denying him due process since investigations into the case began.

The petition follows an earlier letter submitted by his lawyers on July 9, 2026, raising concerns over alleged breaches of his rights and the seizure of his funds by EOCO, which he said received no response.

Abdul-Wahab maintained that he has committed no wrongdoing and remains willing to defend himself through the courts. He said he has confidence in Ghana’s judicial system but believes the actions of the prosecuting authorities have undermined his constitutional rights.

According to the petition, he was first arrested on June 25, 2025, and detained by EOCO for more than two weeks under a GH¢60 million bail condition, which he described as excessive. He further alleged that the Attorney-General publicly commented on the matter before charges were filed, arguing that the remarks compromised his right to be presumed innocent.

He stated that he was later arraigned before High Court Criminal Court 4, where he pleaded not guilty and was granted bail of GH¢100 million with six sureties, four of whom were required to provide landed property. He described the conditions as oppressive and unreasonable.

Abdul-Wahab said the prosecution withdrew all charges against him on May 5, 2026, after the court upheld legal objections raised by his lawyers over alleged procedural irregularities.

However, he claimed that immediately after his discharge, EOCO officers, accompanied by armed personnel, rearrested him within the court premises despite his cooperation throughout the investigations.

He further alleged that he was denied access to his lawyers while in EOCO custody and was taken to hospital without the knowledge of his legal team or family members.

According to the petition, he was released on the evening of May 6 without being questioned and was only interviewed by investigators the following day before being re-arraigned about 11 days later before the Specialised Court.

The former NAFCO CEO also raised concerns over his arrest at Kotoka International Airport on July 4, 2026, despite having obtained a High Court order permitting him to travel to the United Kingdom for medical treatment.

He alleged that after completing immigration and security formalities, he was arrested by BNI officers before boarding his flight and detained for four days without charge.

During that period, Abdul-Wahab claimed the Deputy Attorney-General, Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, alleged on social media that he had attempted to withdraw funds from a frozen bank account.

He denied the allegation, insisting that no evidence had been presented identifying the account or any attempted transaction.

The petition further alleged that EOCO imposed a fresh bail condition of GH¢5 million with two sureties following his transfer from BNI custody and continued to deny him meaningful access to his legal representatives.

Abdul-Wahab also accused EOCO of unlawfully retaining several personal belongings, including £6,700 intended for medical expenses, two mobile phones and his passport.

He further claimed that his mobile phones were accessed without judicial authorisation while in the custody of the security agencies.

Describing his experience as a repeated “catch-and-release” strategy, Abdul-Wahab said he has been arrested and released four times since the case began and questioned whether the actions against him were motivated by legitimate legal processes or personal considerations.

In the petition, he called on the Attorney-General to ensure that public officials refrain from making statements that could prejudice the ongoing case, ensure that all future actions comply with the Constitution and the rule of law, and direct EOCO and the BNI to cease what he described as continued harassment of himself and his family.

He also requested the immediate return of his passport, mobile phones, borrowed funds and all other personal belongings still being held by EOCO.

A copy of the petition was also sent to the Chief Justice.

The engagements also focused on strengthening cooperation between both countries in tackling fraud, corruption, money laundering, and transnational organised crime, including cyber-enabled financial offences.

At the centre of the talks are:

Ken Ofori-Atta extradition case

The extradition discussions involving Ken Ofori-Atta centre on his legal status and ongoing corruption-related investigations in Ghana. The government has formally submitted an extradition request seeking his return to face 78 corruption and procurement-related charges.

According to officials, the case has been complicated by developments in the United States, where he was previously detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) over his immigration status. His legal team has indicated that a U.S. immigration court subsequently granted him lawful permanent residency, reportedly after finding aspects of the Ghanaian state’s charges politically motivated.

However, Ghana’s Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and the Attorney-General have rejected interpretations that the U.S. immigration ruling shields him from prosecution. They maintain that immigration decisions are separate from criminal extradition proceedings under existing treaties.

Authorities say the ongoing DOJ engagement is aimed at processing the formal extradition package and ensuring he is returned to Ghana to face trial in Accra.

Frederick Kumi (Abu Trica) extradition case

Frederick Kumi, widely known as Abu Trica, is also at the centre of extradition proceedings following his arrest in Ghana. He is accused by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Ohio of orchestrating an $8 million romance fraud and wire laundering scheme targeting elderly victims in the United States.

He is facing multiple federal charges, including conspiracy to commit wire fraud and money laundering.

In Ghana, a lower court in Gbese has already granted approval for his extradition to the United States. However, his legal team, supported by activists, has filed a certiorari application at the Accra High Court seeking to overturn the ruling.

They argue that his constitutional rights are being violated and have raised concerns about identity verification procedures used during investigations and prosecution.

The case has triggered widespread public debate, with civil rights advocates questioning the consistency of enforcement actions. They argue that Ghana shouldn’t “rush” to hand over an ordinary citizen to the U.S. while wealthy political figures like Ofori-Atta remain abroad.

Broader Ghana–U.S. law enforcement cooperation

Beyond the two extradition cases, the meetings between EOCO and the U.S. Department of Justice also underscored a broader strategic shift in Ghana’s approach to international crime fighting.

Under Raymond Archer’s leadership, EOCO is prioritising global partnerships to trace illicit financial flows, recover stolen assets, and strengthen prosecution of cross-border criminal networks.

The operational framework discussed with the U.S. DOJ focuses on three key areas: cyber-fraud crackdowns, cryptocurrency-related crime enforcement, and asset recovery and forfeiture.

Speaking on JoyNews’ Newsfile, James Kwabena Bomfeh argued that plea bargaining is an established component of Ghana’s criminal justice system and should not be dismissed outright, particularly in cases where it can secure restitution for the state while avoiding lengthy and costly court proceedings.

According to him, the primary objective of a plea bargain is not merely to secure a conviction but to ensure that justice is achieved in a manner that benefits the public interest.

“The Attorney-General is working for all of us. They must consider all the issues at hand. In the interest of the state, if a plea bargain can achieve justice and recover what is due, then it should be considered,” he said.

However, he added that if such an outcome cannot be achieved through negotiations, then the matter should proceed to a full trial to allow the courts to determine the issues at stake.

Mr Bomfeh noted that plea bargaining has featured prominently in some of the Office of the Special Prosecutor’s successful cases and remains a legitimate tool within the country’s legal framework.

He, however, stressed the need to distinguish between cases where an accused person admits wrongdoing and those where allegations remain contested.

“We need to make a distinction between a plea bargain based on someone committing an offence and admitting to it, and a case where allegations are still being disputed,” he explained.

He also expressed concern over what he described as a growing tendency within the criminal justice system to treat accused persons as guilty before their cases have been fully adjudicated.

He emphasised that Ghana’s Constitution guarantees the presumption of innocence and places an obligation on the state to provide every accused person with a fair opportunity to defend themselves.

“The Constitution is clear that a person is innocent until proven guilty. Yet it is often assumed that once a report is made against someone, that person is guilty and must prove themselves innocent. That turns justice upside down,” he stated.

Commenting specifically on the Wontumi case, Mr Bomfeh observed that public discourse has focused almost exclusively on the NPP chairman, despite court documents indicating that multiple accused persons are involved.

He pointed out that the charge sheet names Bernard Antwi Boasiako, another individual identified as Thomas Antwi Boasiako, who is reportedly at large, and Wontumi Farm Limited as accused persons.

“If the charge sheet is anything to go by, then we are not talking about a Wontumi matter alone. It is Wontumi and others. We need to move away from personalizing it to his person,” he said.

Mr Bomfeh further questioned whether all individuals connected to the alleged offences were being subjected to the same level of scrutiny, arguing that prosecutorial discretion must be exercised fairly and consistently.

“If you are prosecuting for an offence and there are people associated with that offence, why do you leave some and proceed against others? These are questions that deserve answers,” he stated.

His comment follows lawyers of Chairman Wontuni formally requesting a plea negotiation with the Attorney-General in his ongoing criminal trial over an alleged GH¢14.3 million loan fraud involving the Ghana Export-Import Bank (Exim Bank).

Source: Myjoyonline.com

Speaking in an interview with journalists, Dr. Ayine rejected claims by the Minority that the government was attempting to suppress free speech and dissenting opinions in the country.

“I think that the Minority is exaggerating a lot with respect to the question of gagging free speech,” he stated.

According to him, although Ghana’s Constitution guarantees freedom of expression and other fundamental rights, such freedoms are not absolute and can be restricted under specific circumstances.

“There are limits. You can limit free speech if, for instance, it is something that can undermine public order, public morals, or for law enforcement reasons,” he explained.

Dr. Ayine argued that the government cannot remain passive when individuals use public platforms to spread messages capable of inciting hatred, division or violence in society.

“So if someone, for instance, is inciting hatred in our society, we do not expect that the Minority will say that we should sit down idly as a government and allow that person to go on,” he said.

He referenced the role of dangerous speech and media propaganda during the Rwandan genocide as an example of the consequences of unchecked incitement.

“Those are some of the things that led to wars in countries such as Rwanda. It was the use of the media that incited the genocide that eventually took place in Rwanda,” he added.

Dr. Ayine maintained that the government under John Dramani Mahama remains committed to protecting democratic freedoms and freedom of expression.

“He understands the importance of free speech in a democratic society,” he noted.

However, he cautioned against the abuse of freedom of expression in ways that could threaten peace and public order.

His comments follow recent remarks by Salam Mustapha and also come amid discussions surrounding the remand of Kwame Baffoe over allegations of offensive conduct likely to breach the peace and publication of false statements against a judge.

READ ALSO:

NPP petition to diplomatic corps is a diversionary tactic – Akwatia MP

NPP not intimidated by arrests of party members – Nana B

His concerns follow a High Court ruling on Wednesday, April 15, 2026, which directed the Attorney-General’s Department to assume responsibility for all ongoing criminal prosecutions being handled by the OSP, pending formal clearance from the Attorney-General’s office.

In a detailed legal analysis, Mr Amidu argued that the Attorney-General’s Statement of Case—filed after seeking an extension of time—appears to largely align with the arguments of the plaintiff challenging key provisions of the law establishing the OSP, rather than offering a neutral defence of the state.

The case, filed in December 2025 by one Noah Ephraem Tetteh Adamtey, seeks constitutional interpretation of aspects of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959), particularly whether it improperly grants prosecutorial independence in violation of Article 88 of the 1992 Constitution.

Mr Amidu noted that the Attorney-General failed to respond within the required timeframe and only applied for an extension on April 8, 2026—months after the suit was initiated. The Supreme Court has since granted the request.

He expressed concern that the Attorney-General’s filings appear to favour the plaintiff’s position, describing the stance as one that does not reflect an impartial defence of the state’s interests.

According to him, the Attorney-General, as a constitutional officer of the court, is expected to assist in the fair determination of cases rather than adopt positions that suggest alignment with one party.

He further suggested that the current posture could create the impression of a “collusive action,” raising questions about the ethics surrounding the state’s handling of the litigation.

Mr Amidu also criticised reactions from sections of civil society over the Supreme Court’s earlier decision not to join the OSP as a party to the proceedings, insisting the ruling was consistent with Article 88(5) of the Constitution, which requires that suits against the state be brought through the Attorney-General.

He argued that stakeholders dissatisfied with the process should formally apply to the court as interested parties instead of engaging in public criticism.

On the substantive legal questions, the former Special Prosecutor pointed to what he described as weaknesses in the plaintiff’s interpretation of Sections 3 and 4 of Act 959, arguing that they do not support claims of excessive prosecutorial independence.

He also identified inconsistencies in the reliefs being sought, suggesting that parts of the case may not withstand rigorous legal scrutiny.

Mr Amidu further faulted aspects of the Attorney-General’s response, describing portions of it as contradictory and insufficient in addressing the constitutional balance between the Presidency, the Attorney-General, and the Special Prosecutor.

Beyond the courtroom arguments, he warned that the dispute reflects a deeper institutional strain between the OSP and the Attorney-General’s Department.

“The relationship between the Special Prosecutor and the Attorney-General under this Government has broken down beyond repair,” he said.

“At the end of the day, the Special Prosecutor and the Attorney-General cannot co-exist and cooperate.”

The case is expected to set a significant precedent on the limits of prosecutorial authority in Ghana, with wide-ranging implications for the country’s anti-corruption institutions.

In an interview on Joy FM’s MiddayNews on Thursday, he expressed strong reservations about what he described as the “hurried” manner in which the High Court judge handled the matter, despite a related constitutional issue currently pending before the Supreme Court of Ghana.

According to him, once a matter touching on constitutional interpretation is before the Supreme Court, lower courts are expected to exercise restraint until a final determination is made by the apex court.

“I’m a bit disappointed with what is going on. In the first place, I cannot get my mind to the hurried manner, or (I’m) tempted to say the indecent rate with which the higher court judge has dealt with this matter, much more so when the matter itself is pending before the Supreme Court.

“When the matter is pending before the Supreme Court for adjudication of the Constitution, and that matter comes to a lower court, the relevant issue statement has been determination of the matter.

“The Supreme Court is the only court which has the mandate to interpret the Constitution. It is therefore surprising that a High Court would proceed to deal with the matter in this manner,” he said.

His comments follow an Accra High Court ruling that the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) lacks independent authority to prosecute criminal cases, directing that all matters initiated by the anti-corruption body be referred to the Attorney-General’s Department.

The decision, delivered on Wednesday, has created uncertainty over ongoing prosecutions handled by the OSP, placing them effectively in abeyance pending further legal direction.

Presiding judge, Justice John Eugene Nyadu Nyante, held that although the OSP is empowered to investigate corruption-related offences, it lacks the constitutional mandate to independently initiate prosecutions.

The court based its ruling on Article 88 of the 1992 Constitution, which vests prosecutorial authority in the Attorney-General.

According to him, the court ordered that all cases being handled by the OSP be taken over by the Attorney-General until the anti-corruption body obtains the required constitutional authorisation to prosecute.

The ruling stems from a case filed by an accused person, Peter Archibald Hyde, who challenged the OSP to demonstrate that it had the Attorney-General’s approval to initiate and conduct prosecutions.

His lawyer argued that both the Constitution and the OSP Act require the Special Prosecutor to act with authorisation from the Attorney-General. Court records indicated that the OSP was unable to provide evidence of such authorisation.

Dr Srem-Sai stated that the Attorney-General will comply fully with the court’s directive and has no intention of disregarding the ruling.

He added that steps will be taken in the coming days to implement the order and ensure a smooth transition of the affected cases.

READ ALSO:

Turkish Police arrest 162 people over online posts on deadly school shootings

He talks too much – NDC Communications team member criticises OSP

Speaking on Asempa FM’s Ekosii Sen show, he argued that the Constitution clearly grants prosecutorial authority to the Attorney-General, making additional anti-corruption bodies redundant.

According to him, institutions such as the Office of the Special Prosecutor and the Economic and Organised Crime Office are not essential to Ghana’s governance framework, as the Attorney-General remains the constitutionally mandated authority to prosecute criminal cases.

His comments follow a recent High Court ruling in Accra which held that the OSP does not have independent prosecutorial powers and must refer cases to the Attorney-General’s Department.

Mr Ansa-Asare further stated that the creation of multiple anti-corruption institutions could be politically motivated and unnecessary.

He therefore called for a review of such institutions, suggesting that strengthening the Attorney-General’s office would be more effective in tackling corruption.

“The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) was created by Parliament, and the Attorney-General serves as the constitutional authority. The Constitution is the supreme law, which grants Parliament its power. The Attorney-General holds prosecutorial power, not the Special Prosecutor. At times, politicians may seek to protect themselves from their corrupt activities. Many of the offices being created are related to corruption.

“Under the Constitution, the Attorney-General holds this responsibility, and we have established rules pertaining to natural justice; this should be common sense. Therefore, the OSP is not needed and should be abolished,” he added.

READ ALSO:

The decision is sweet but not the final position – Martin Kpebu on OSP’s…

OSP to challenge High Court decision on its prosecutorial powers

Attorney General to take over all prosecution as High Court strips OSP of powers

Speaking in an interview with Akwasi Nsiah on Badwam on Adom TV, the South Dayi MP revealed that in the 2026 budget, government allocated about GH¢250 million each to the two institutions.

“The Attorney-General and the OSP were given virtually the same budget, about GH¢250 million each, but the outcomes are clearly not the same,” he stated.

Dafeamekpor highlighted that while the Attorney-General’s Department is prosecuting over 10,000 cases, the OSP has handled only seven cases with a similar allocation. “You have the Attorney-General prosecuting over 10,000 cases, yet the OSP, with the same resources, is doing about seven cases. It raises serious concerns about value for money,” he argued.

The lawmaker further disclosed that he, together with the Majority Leader, Mahama Ayariga, had intended to introduce a private member’s bill in Parliament to scrap the Office of the Special Prosecutor over what they describe as underperformance. However, the move was halted following intervention from President John Dramani Mahama.

“If not for the President’s intervention, we would have gone ahead to file the motion and ensure the Office of the Special Prosecutor is scrapped,” Dafeamekpor revealed.

He maintained that despite its mandate to independently investigate and prosecute corruption-related offences, the OSP has not delivered the expected results. “The disparity raises questions about the overall impact of the Special Prosecutor in the fight against corruption,” he said.

Dafeamekpor suggested that resources allocated to the OSP could be redirected to strengthen existing institutions, such as the Attorney-General’s Department and other investigative bodies, to improve efficiency.

He also commented on the leadership of the Office, acknowledging the competence of the current Special Prosecutor, Kissi Agyebeng. “Kissi Agyebeng is a good lawyer, but you ask yourself why they are unable to secure wins in the cases they take to court,” he added.

ALSO READ:

Police deploy reinforcements to Nkwanta after violent attacks

‘Why cut what you just raised?’ — Sophia Akuffo questions gov’t…

According to the Ministry, the report has been formally referred to the Attorney-General to initiate appropriate legal action against those found responsible for the irregularities.

Deputy Minister for Finance, Thomas Nyarko Ampem, made the disclosure while delivering a statement in Parliament on Tuesday, March 10, on behalf of Finance Minister Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson.

He indicated that individuals who abused their offices, colluded with contractors, falsified records, or attempted to siphon public funds through questionable claims would be held to account.

“Speaker, the Minister for Finance has formally referred the report of the Auditor-General to the Attorney-General to bring to account those responsible for this rape of the public purse. Those who abused their offices, colluded with contractors, falsified records, or attempted to loot the public purse through the back door will be held to account,” he said.

Mr. Nyarko Ampem further stressed that the Ministry of Finance will no longer serve as a “rubber stamp” for weak financial controls and falsified claims, signalling a renewed commitment to strengthening accountability and discipline in the management of public finances.

“Speaker, the Ministry of Finance will no longer serve as a rubber stamp for weak controls and falsified claims,” he stated.

He emphasised that the government remains resolute in its efforts to clamp down on fraud and mismanagement within the public sector.

“The Mahama administration refuses to accept this rotten system. We refuse to normalise waste, and we refuse to ask the Ghanaian people to pay for fraud,” he added.

The Auditor-General’s report, presented on March 10, 2026, outlines the stock of arrears and unpaid obligations accumulated by government entities as at the end of 2024 and highlights several instances of financial mismanagement across various institutions.

He said no case under the programme had been compromised, contrary to reports in sections of the media.

Speaking during a visit by Vice-President Professor Jane Naana Opoku-Agyemang to the Office of the Attorney-General and Ministry of Justice, Dr Ayine assured the public that his office had not entered into any plea negotiations or deals with persons implicated in ORAL-related offences.

“No docket has come here that has been compromised in any way. No deal, no plea arrangement has been entered into with anybody who has committed an offence that comes within the ambit of ORAL,” he stated.

Dr Ayine said the dockets were undergoing critical scrutiny and that investigative bodies would be directed to provide additional evidence where gaps were identified.

He cited the ongoing National Service prosecution as an example of that approach.

“When we notice loopholes in the investigations, we will tell the investigative authorities to bring us more evidence,” he said, adding that accountability under the ORAL programme remained non-negotiable.

The Attorney-General said that although his office engaged in plea bargaining in certain criminal cases, such as murder or manslaughter, that did not apply to ORAL cases, despite public speculation.

The visit formed part of efforts to strengthen collaboration between the Executive and key justice institutions as the government intensified its accountability and asset recovery agenda.

Dr Ayine also expressed concern about what he described as a “tsunami” of land compensation claims against the State, some amounting to hundreds of millions of Ghana cedis.

“The figures are mind-blowing. We are looking at billions of Ghana cedis in land compensation claims,” he warned, noting that many were based on colonial-era documents.

He said claimants often relied on old archival records to argue that compensation had not been paid for compulsorily acquired lands.

Dr Ayine said such cases frequently succeeded in court, sometimes reaching the Supreme Court, thereby increasing the State’s financial exposure.

He said he had directed the Solicitor-General to prepare a detailed brief for the President on the scale of the problem and its implications for public finances, describing it as a major challenge requiring urgent attention.

Dr Ayine disclosed that 10 international arbitration cases were currently pending against the State.

“We inherited about nine of them when we came into office,” he said, adding that “one was just filed last year against the government of Ghana by a company known as Blue Gold, and that is the only arbitration that has come, but the antecedents or actions that triggered the arbitration occurred before we assumed office.

“So we take responsibility technically, but we were not the ones who took the actions that triggered the arbitration, but we are handling it as if we did, because we have a responsibility to the state as our only client to defend the interests of the state as much as possible,” he said.

Dr Ayine also highlighted staffing and funding challenges at the Ministry, particularly within the Legislative Drafting Division.

“They are overworked and underpaid,” he said, calling for urgent investment in training additional legislative drafters.

To boost internal revenue generation, Dr Ayine announced plans to introduce a Criminal Proceeds Recovery Bill to allow the Attorney-General’s Office to confiscate assets linked to criminal activity through criminal and civil processes.

Professor Opoku-Agyemang commended the Attorney-General and his team for their work and pledged government support.

“We want to assure you that we have your back,” she said, urging enhanced public education to counter misinformation, particularly on ORAL and plea bargaining.

She also urged State agencies to act responsibly to curb the growing incidence of international arbitrations against the country.

“Regardless of who initiated the international arbitrations we are facing, it is ultimately about the country. Going forward, all state agencies must be careful to do the right things at all times, so that we do not leave behind actions and legacies that expose the state to avoidable international arbitration.”

Speaking in an interview on JoyNews’ Newsfile, Dr. Ayine said preliminary assessments have already been made on the amount of money that can realistically be recovered within the year.

“We have developed estimates of what is capable of being collected. Very soon, this year, I am sure things will start flowing into the government’s coffers. Money will start flowing into the government chest with respect to ORAL,” he stated.

However, the Attorney-General cautioned that he could not state with absolute certainty whether the government would recover the full GH¢21 billion projected under the initiative.

“The question of whether we will be able to get exactly the 21 billion projected is one that I cannot answer with mathematical certainty at this point,” he said.

Dr. Ayine explained that extensive work is currently underway, both locally and internationally, to track and recover misappropriated state funds. On the local front, he said his office is working closely with the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) and the National Intelligence Bureau (NIB).

In addition, the Attorney-General revealed the existence of a special clandestine investigations team that reports directly to him.

He expressed confidence that the coordinated efforts of local agencies and foreign partners would soon translate into tangible financial recoveries for the state, reinforcing the government’s commitment to accountability and the protection of public resources.

ALSO READ:

• ORAL on course despite public impatience for arrests – Rosemond Obeng

• ORAL: Gov’t has turned prosecutions into performances – Kwesi Botchway Jnr

Speaking in Parliament on Wednesday, December 4, Mr. Ayariga questioned why the Attorney-General remains under-resourced while significant budgetary allocations continue to be directed to the OSP, which he believes has not lived up to expectations.

“Look at the budget — why have we not been resourcing the Attorney-General? After resourcing the OSP more than the Attorney-General, the OSP is still not delivering. I am of a strong conviction that the OSP should be abolished, whether through a private member’s bill as advised by former Speaker Prof. Mike Oquaye, or a call on the Executive to expedite a bill that we will consider and approve in this House,” he said.

Mr. Ayariga also rejected claims that abolishing the OSP would allow corrupt individuals to escape accountability.

“Let me sound a warning that the abolition of the OSP will not leave individuals engaged in corruption off the hook. I will ensure that the process is expedited,” he added.

His remarks come amid heightened public attention on the OSP following the recent detention of private legal practitioner Martin Kpebu after a confrontation with security officers at the OSP headquarters.

His comments come amid public speculation about a supposed rift between the two offices over the extradition case involving former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta. Both the AG and the OSP have dismissed these claims, insisting there is no friction.

Speaking during a Q&A session on X Spaces on Sunday, November 23, Mr. Fuseini stressed the importance of harmony between the two institutions.

“They should be in complementary relationships; all should be in their lanes,” he said.

This follows revelations in court that the statements, believed to be crucial to the ongoing case of The Republic v. Kwabena Adu-Boahene and two others, were not included in the EOCO report before the court.

The directive was issued by the presiding judge, Justice Eugene Nyadu Nyantei, on Wednesday, November 12, 2025, after lead defence counsel, Samuel Atta Akyea, drew the court’s attention to inconsistencies in the testimony of the prosecution witness, Madam Edith Ruby Opokua Adumuah, Head of Finance at the National Signals Bureau (NSB).

During proceedings, Mr. Atta Akyea raised concerns that the witness had earlier admitted to making three statements at EOCO, but two of them appeared to be missing from the case record. He therefore prayed the court to compel the prosecution to produce the omitted statements.

At both the bench and the bar, Mr. Atta Akyea insisted that “some three statements” made by the witness had been withheld from the court record, arguing that the missing documents might contain material information relevant to the defence’s case.

The presiding judge, after hearing arguments from both sides, questioned the witness directly.

“If you are given the opportunity, will you be able to remember the number of houses you told EOCO you owned?” he asked. Mrs. Adumuah replied, “Yes.”

The judge also observed that the witness appeared confused by certain questions during cross-examination and therefore advised her to answer “yes” or “no” before giving any explanations.

He emphasised that it was his duty to protect witnesses and ensure that they were not misled or pressured into unclear testimony.

Commenting on earlier exchanges between the bench and counsel, the judge stated that he had not altered the witness’s evidence as suggested by Mr. Atta Akyea, but had only sought to clarify her misunderstanding of the question concerning her three statements at EOCO.

The court further noted that it is not every civil servant who is aware of the commencement of a criminal case, after the witness indicated she did not know when the accused persons were first arraigned.

The judge subsequently invited both counsels to the bench for a brief consultation before directing the defence counsel to proceed with his final question.

In his ruling, the presiding judge ordered that the two missing witness statements be retrieved from EOCO and delivered to the court by close of day tomorrow.

He also directed that any audio recordings in EOCO’s custody relating to the witness’s interrogation, if available, should be procured by the Attorney-General and filed as part of further disclosures.

When Mr. Atta Akyea urged the court to allow the defence to fully probe the matter, describing the judge as “the referee” who must ensure that justice is not restrained, the judge assured him that he shared the same objective, stating, “That is my interest; leave that to me.”

Before adjourning the case, the presiding judge indicated that he would order the witness to produce certain letters referenced in her testimony on a later date.

The witness, Madam Adumuah, had earlier told the court that she often received instructions from her superior officers regarding financial matters at the NSB, sometimes through emails on which she was not copied directly.

“As I mentioned earlier, my boss is the one who sends it to me; sometimes I am not copied in the email, but I still take instructions from my boss on what to do,” she said this while being cross-examined. 

Lawyer Atta Akyea argued that the witness had already indicated she was informed by the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) that her engagement with the institution was being recorded.

Atta Akyea further explained that according to the Practice Direction on Disclosures and Case Management in Criminal Proceedings, 2018 (which lists audio, video and electronic recordings among disclosure materials)…”.

“So, why the opposition,” he questioned, “unless the Attorney-General intends to conceal exculpatory evidence? I do not see how this lawful request forms the basis for a preliminary objection.”

According to him, denying access to the audio evidence would amount to the concealment of material that is clearly admissible under the law.

“On this showing,” Lawyer Atta Akyea pleaded, “I crave your indulgence to overrule the opposition to further disclosures so that, in the ultimate interest of justice, My Lord will know what was said at EOCO and what is being said here in Court.”

However, the Deputy Attorney-General, Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, maintained that there exists no such audio recording.

The case has been adjourned to December 9, 10, and 11, 2025, for the continuation of cross-examination.

Cross-Examination

During the cross-examination, Lawyer also Atta Akyea questioned the witness on her encounter with EOCO and her role in the ongoing case.

Atta Akyea’s question: “In your testimony so far, you did not inform the court that when you voluntarily showed up at EOCO, you were arrested and later granted bail.”

Prosecution Witness answer: “No, I disagree.”

Question: “I further put it to you that you were a suspect in the case.”

Answer: “No.”

Question: “Indeed, EOCO informed you and your lawyer that you were being investigated for some crimes associated with your office.”

Answer: “No, I disagree.”

Question: “You told this Honourable Court that you gave three statements and one caution statement.”

Answer: “Yes, I gave three statements but I do not remember the caution statement.”

Question: “So was your house searched at all?”

Answer: “Yes.”

Question: “More than one of your houses was searched?”

Answer: “No, I was only asked to identify if I had other houses.”

Discover more

Activewear

Sports

Entertainment center

When Mr. Atta Akyea asked which of her other houses was not searched, the presiding judge restrained the witness from answering.

Discover more

Entertainment center

Sports

Activewear

Question: “Do you have other houses apart from the one that was searched?”

Answer: “Yes.”

At that point, the prosecution objected to further questioning on the issue, arguing that it was irrelevant to the case.

Mr. Atta Akyea rebutted that the line of questioning was relevant because it followed the witness’s own statement made to EOCO.

He maintained that disallowing the question could distort the proceedings and subvert the rules of cross-examination. “If the Deputy Attorney General believes their witness should not be cross-examined, then she should not have been fielded in the first place,” he argued, urging the court to overrule the objection.

Question: “Per the documents before you, you were not charged by EOCO?”

Answer: “Yes, I believe investigations are meant to find out the truth, so if EOCO says I was not charged, I have nothing to say about it.”

Question: “The three statements you disclosed to EOCO exclude the one you signed out of EOCO on May 9, 2025?”

Answer: “Yes.”

At this point, Mr. Atta Akyea prayed the court to order that the three other statements be produced before the judge to enable him to continue his cross-examination. The presiding judge, however, directed that the witness’s previous answer be corrected, stating that she had misunderstood the question.

Question: “When you appeared before EOCO, were you told that the interrogation was being recorded?”

Answer: “Yes.”

Question: “You are to testify to the truth, and that truth may not necessarily be limited to your office?”

Answer: “I have a letter from my office directing me to come to court to testify.”

Question: “Is it not the case that only a suspect is admitted to bail?”

Answer: “I don’t know.”

Question: “I put it to you that EOCO admitted you to bail because you were a suspect.”

Answer: “I don’t know.”

Mr. Atta Akyea also revisited issues of invoices presented in the witness’s earlier testimony.

Question: “At the last sitting, you made a comparison between two invoices with the same number, NSC006, generated by ICS. Holdings Ltd. Can you refresh your memory on this matter?”

Answer: “Yes.”

Question: “The items in both invoices are different?”

Answer: “They are two different items with the same invoice number.”

Question: “With one of the invoices, who was it addressed to? And what about the other?”

Answer: “One was addressed to the National Security Council, Accra-Ghana, and the other to BNC.”

After several exchanges and objections, the presiding judge, Justice Eugene Nyadu Nyantei, adjourned the proceedings to December 9, 10, and 11, 2025, for the continuation of cross-examination.

ALSO READ:

• Supreme Court dismisses motion to bar Justice Nyante Nyadu from Adu-Boahene trial

• Atta Akyea defends courtroom walkout in Adu-Boahene’s trial

A notice filed at the Accra High Court (Criminal Division) on Monday, November 4, confirmed the withdrawal under Section 59 of the Criminal and Other Offences (Procedure) Act, 1960 (Act 30).

The document, signed by Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem Sai, stated that Mr. Akuoko had been discharged from all criminal charges related to the Akonta Mining case.

Mr. Akuoko had been standing trial alongside Akonta Mining Limited, Chairman Wontumi, Operations Manager Kwadwo Owusu Bempah, and co-director Kwame Antwi — both of whom remain at large.

The accused faced multiple charges, including engaging in mining operations without a licence, felling trees in a forest reserve without authorisation, abetting unauthorised felling of trees, and erecting structures in a protected area without approval.

Investigations began after petitions alleged that Akonta Mining was conducting illegal mining operations within the Tano Nimiri Forest Reserve without the required permits.

Although the company reportedly secured leases in Samreboi and Abekoase in July 2022, its application to mine within the forest reserve was rejected in August 2022. Despite this, the company allegedly deployed excavators into the protected area and began full-scale operations.

Officials later discovered unauthorised structures, including checkpoints and makeshift accommodation for miners. The environmental damage was described as severe, with over 13 hectares of forest destroyed and parts of the Tano River polluted.

The charge sheet also referenced an incident on August 17, 2022, when a joint team from the Forestry Commission, Samartex Timber and Plywood Company, and journalists was allegedly confronted by an armed group led by Akuoko and Bempah. The team was reportedly forced to surrender seized equipment before being allowed to leave.

With the Attorney-General’s latest decision, Mr. Akuoko has been formally cleared of all charges, while the case against Akonta Mining and its other directors continues before the court.

Source: Adomonline

ALSO READ:

• Wontumi, Akonta Mining plead not guilty to galamsey charges  

• Galamsey: Wontumi, Akonta Mining manager granted GHC10m bail each in Tano Nimri case

Source: Adomonline

ALSO READ:

• Show humility and seek dialogue with Attorney General – Wontumi’s lawyer told

Speaking on Top Story on Joy FM, Andy Appiah-Kubi said his client has not done anything like that, stressing that it is premature to even discuss a plea deal since the case has not yet advanced to that stage.

According to him, the defence team is awaiting the Attorney-General’s next legal steps before deciding on their course of action.

His comments follow recent revelations by Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Dr. Dominic Ayine, that several offers were made to his office in connection with the ongoing prosecution of Chairman Wontumi over alleged illegal mining activities.

Dr. Ayine, speaking during the Government Accountability Series on Wednesday, said he rejected all such offers, insisting that any plea bargain would only be considered under the supervision of a competent court.

He maintained that no political or external influence has affected his prosecutorial decisions, adding that claims by the NPP suggesting he was “cutting deals” were entirely false.

“No deal has been cut, and no deal will be cut except under the auspices of a court of competent jurisdiction,” the Attorney-General stressed.

Chairman Wontumi is facing prosecution over alleged illegal mining (galamsey) activities linked to Akonta Mining Limited.

He is accused of operating without a valid license, assigning mineral rights without ministerial approval, and facilitating unlicensed mining in the Samreboi Forest Reserve in the Western Region.

A joint security operation in April 2025 uncovered excavators, cash, firearms, and other equipment allegedly used for illegal mining.

Wontumi has pleaded not guilty and was granted bail by the High Court in Accra, with conditions including the surrender of his passport and placement on a stop list.

Source: Myjoyonline

ALSO READ:

• I’m not under pressure to cut deals in corruption cases – Attorney-General

• It appears Wontumi’s case has taken a political twist – Former Law School Director

He attributed the perceived delay in the extradition process to timing, explaining that the OSP is finalising investigations before submitting the necessary documents to the AG.

“There is no bad blood between the OSP and the Attorney-General, nor is there any contention over the case docket. The issue at hand is primarily one of timing,” he wrote.

According to Mr. Darko, the OSP is wrapping up investigations into several related cases involving Mr. Ofori-Atta and plans to file additional charges before transferring the full docket to the Attorney-General’s office.

Once completed, the AG will take over the extradition proceedings.

The OSP earlier secured an Interpol Red Notice to assist in locating and arresting Mr. Ofori-Atta abroad as part of corruption-related investigations.

Mr. Darko acknowledged that the Attorney-General’s office may be under public pressure to act quickly but urged patience, emphasizing that both offices are following due process.

He also cautioned against what he called “partial leaks” of sensitive information, warning that such actions could endanger OSP officers and distort public perception of the case. “Certainly, the leak could not have originated from the OSP.

“The Office would never compromise the safety of its officers or jeopardise a case it has pursued diligently since February,” he stressed.

While the AG’s office is responsible for the formal extradition process, the OSP will provide the necessary evidence and documentation to support the case in court.

The Special Prosecutor is expected to forward the required materials to the AG within the week to enable the next steps in the extradition process.

Source: Adomonline

ALSO READ:

• OSP denies blocking extradition of Ofori-Atta

• Ofori-Atta is well and not in hiding — Lawyer

The President, who has pledged to fully implement the report’s recommendations, said adequate compensation would be provided to victims, including families of those who lost their lives and individuals left with injuries.

“Last week, I received the investigative report on the two incidents. It details and catalogues everyone who was affected by the violence and the circumstances that led to it,” Mahama revealed during a courtesy call by executives of the Ghana Journalists Association (GJA).

He explained that the Attorney-General has been tasked to review the report, determine compensation packages, and, where necessary, prosecute those found culpable.

The President further stressed that election violence had affected not only political activists and innocent bystanders but also journalists who were carrying out their duties.

Source: Adomonline

READ ALSO:

• Mahama praises Greater Accra Minister for demolishing illegal structures at Ramsar site
• Chief Justice Torkornoo asked Mahama to let her retire with benefits – Amaliba reveals

The lawyer disclosed that he has ceased all communication with Attorney General Dr. Dominic Ayine, citing concerns that their conversations might be recorded and misrepresented.

This development follows an Accra High Court ruling to remand Adu-Boahene in EOCO custody for seven working days to allow the Attorney General’s office time to complete witness statements.

The case has been adjourned to May 13 for further directions.

Atta Akyea accused the prosecution of employing delay tactics and acting in bad faith.

He said he would no longer engage with the Attorney General, expressing fears that any communication could be leaked or distorted.

“I don’t want to eat a meal which is not cooked. I thought we should wait. And then what they [Attorney General] said in the press, that they will never prosecute anybody unless they have all the evidence – you see, this cancels the initial position. We don’t have the evidence, but we rushed the man to court and then plead with the court for more time.”

The lawyer insisted his client deserves a fair trial, free from procedural manipulation.

“That is a travesty of justice – playing with the liberty of the individual,” he told journalists at the court premises.

The court ruling followed previous proceedings that were adjourned to consider a bail application.

Prosecutors argued they needed more time to prepare their case. EOCO officials subsequently took Adu-Boahene into custody immediately after the court’s decision.

Background

Attorney General Dominic Ayine has formally charged the former Director-General of the National Signals Bureau, Kwabena Adu-Boahene, and his wife, Angela Adjei Boateng, with corruption-related offences amounting to several millions of cedis.

Alongside two others – Mildred Donkor and Advantage Solutions Limited – they face 11 counts, including stealing, money laundering, defrauding by false pretences, and wilfully causing financial loss.

According to court documents filed on Wednesday, April 30, Adu-Boahene, who oversaw critical national security infrastructure, including contracts with foreign entities, signed a $7 million deal with Israeli firm ISC Holdings Limited to procure cyber defence software.

He is alleged to have diverted approximately GH¢49 million (around $7 million) from NSB funds into his personal accounts, falsely claiming the transactions were legitimate payments for the software, in collusion with his accomplice.

ALSO READ:

• Adu-Boahene remanded into EOCO’s custody for 7 days

• A-G formally charges Adu-Boahene, wife over alleged $7m corruption scandal

He emphasized that effective criminal prosecution begins with a solid national legal foundation, stating, a robust legal system at the national level is essential to investigating and prosecuting international crimes independently.

Speaking at the 23rd Session of the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, Dame stressed the need to reduce dependency on external judicial bodies by establishing strong, self-sufficient national legal systems.

He further noted that the ICC, while crucial, cannot address all international crimes that occur within individual countries’ jurisdictions.
Dame suggested that African countries should consider adopting the Rome Statute or creating specific laws that classify crimes such as war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity, ensuring that punishments align with international standards.

He argued that this approach would demonstrate national sovereignty and reduce the need for ICC intervention by promoting accountability within domestic systems.

Linking strong legal frameworks to the broader principles of democracy, Dame pointed out that a democratic society, grounded in constitutional governance, security, and freedom of expression, inherently reduces the chances of atrocities like genocide and war crimes.

The Attorney General also discussed the ICC’s principle of complementarity, which prioritizes national efforts to prosecute international crimes before involving international courts.

He praised the Court’s global efforts but stressed the importance of strengthening partnerships with local authorities to build national capabilities that support the ICC’s work. He referenced the Central African Republic as a successful example of such collaboration.

Mr Dame reaffirmed Ghana’s commitment to the ICC’s mission and pledged continued support for the Court’s efforts. However, he also stressed the importance of geographical neutrality in the ICC’s approach to justice.

He welcomed recent ICC initiatives, including investigations outside of Africa and the establishment of field offices, which he believes will help combat perceptions of bias. Dame also voiced support for ongoing ICC reforms, such as the Review Mechanism and the Independent Oversight Mechanism, aimed at improving the Court’s efficiency.

In terms of ICC staffing, Dame called for fairness in recruitment, advocating for geographical and gender diversity. He argued that a diverse workforce would enhance the Court’s effectiveness by incorporating a range of perspectives and experiences.

Additionally, he mentioned the Africa Centre for International Criminal Justice (ACICJ) at the GIMPA Law School as an example of the country’s dedication to the ICC’s mission.

“If they want, they can do so by giving me a bed to sleep in the court to enable me to attend the court, but the New Patriotic Party will lose the bye-election,” he said.

“They can further give me a chamber to sleep in the court, but Assin North will fall to me,” he noted.

Mr Quayson, who is also the National Democratic Congress’ (NDC) candidate for the Assin North bye-election slated for June 27, 2023, made these comments in reaction to the court’s decision to hear his perjury case daily.

Speaking on Accra-based Joy FM, he said, “They can share money ahead of the bye-election, but the people will vote against them.

“I want to even disguise myself and collect some of the money and distribute it to the chiefs and people of the area,” he added.

He commented on developmental efforts, which are claimed to be the government’s move to woo the people of the constituency.

He noted that the people of the area deserve development, and if the government is bringing it because of the bye-election, there is nothing wrong with it.

The perjury and forgery trial against James Gyakye Quayson will be heard on a day-to-day basis beginning Tuesday, June 20, 2023, the High Court ruled.

This comes after the court, presided over by Justice Mary Maame Ekue Yanzuh, turned down a prayer by Quayson’s lawyer, Justin Terriwajjah, seeking to have the trial continued after the Assin North bye-election slated for June 27, 2023.

The counsel argued that his client was embarking on national duty in a bid to represent the people of Assin North in parliament, hence the need to continue the trial after the bye-election for Quayson to have a level playing field in the campaign.

However, the Attorney-General, Godfred Yeboah Dame, who described the decision by Mr Quayson to contest the bye-election as a “voluntary and selfish quest,” opposed the prayer, stressing that nobody had given Mr Quayson a national assignment.

He argued that considering the charges levelled against Mr Quayson, he could be convicted and jailed if found guilty, hence the need to try the case expeditiously to bring clarity on Mr Quayson’s status.

He, therefore, prayed the court to hear the case on a day-to-day basis, beginning next week.

Mr Terriwajjah agreed to the trial being conducted on a day-to-day basis but prayed for that to be done only after the bye-election.

His prayer was dismissed subsequently by the court.

The court has since fixed June 20, 21, and 23 for the trial to continue.

Mr Quayson, who is facing charges of forgery and perjury concerning certain alleged offences in the run-up to the 2020 Assin North parliamentary election, will have his lawyers continue the cross-examination of the first prosecution witness.

The accused, Mr Quayson, was present in court.

State prosecutors have charged Mr Quayson with five counts of forgery of a passport or travel certificate, knowingly making a false statutory declaration, perjury, and false declaration for office.

Charges

It is the case of the prosecution that Mr Quayson allegedly made a false statement to the Passport Office that he did not hold a passport to another country when he applied for a Ghanaian passport.

In addition, the prosecution has accused Mr Quayson of making a false declaration to the Electoral Commission to the effect that he (Quayson) did not owe any allegiance to a foreign country when he filed to contest as a candidate for the Assin North seat.

ALSO READ:

• Former NPP general secretary exposes scheme to undermine Alan Kyerematen using ‘Alan Cash’ name [Listen]
• National Anthem brouhaha: Akufo-Addo wasn’t angry at Henry Quartey – RCC

He observed that the government’s efforts at widening the tax net and consequently prosecuting its development agenda are being frustrated by some big oil companies.

According to him, EOCO in the past had reneged on its role in the recovery of proceeds of crime over the years.

Speaking after the inauguration of the governing board of EOCO on Wednesday, March 2, Mr Dame said the mandate to recover proceeds of crimes makes EOCO a revenue-generating organisation for the government.

He said “On my working visit to the offices of EOCO recently, I felt constraint to make the remark about the relatively low record of money it had recovered from the proceeds of crime.

“It is undesirable for perpetrators of economic crime to conceal or keep the fruits of the crimes against the people of Ghana. Such a situation breeds mistrust in the system and rubs the nation with the much-needed revenue for the executive of lofty development projects.

ALSO READ:

• EOCO exposes two online Ponzi schemes

• EOCO, NLA to fight fraudsters robbing Ghana of millions of Cedis

“In my respectful view, the mandate to recover proceeds of crime is one that places EOCO squarely in the position to contribute to the national purse by being a major generator of revenue.

“I implore the new board to formulate policies and superintend the affairs of the organisation in the manner so as to efficiently boost its recovery of proceeds of crime.”

The deal is the culmination of months of negotiations between the Office of the A-G and the Scholarship Secretariat, on the one hand, and the Office of the A-G and the Georgetown University Law Center, on the other.

The agreement seeks to implement a joint graduate scholarship programme over the next five years and results from an intention to strengthen the ties between Georgetown University and the legal fraternity in Ghana, enhance the linkages between the people of Ghana and those of the USA and improve cooperation between the two countries in the field of legal education.

It was made official last Thursday when the Attorney-General visited the USA last week.

Mr Dame signed the agreement for the A-G’s Office, while the Executive Vice-President and Dean of the Georgetown University Law Center, Professor William M. Treanor, signed for his institution.

Under the agreement, the Georgetown Law Center, in collaboration with the Scholarship Secretariat, will offer scholarships to five Ghanaians selected by a selection committee every year, to pursue Master of Laws (LLM) and doctorate in Law (SJD) degrees every year for the next five years.

The committee will be set up between the two parties and chaired by a Ghanaian alumnus of the Georgetown Law Center.

The agreement comes into force immediately and will admit students to the Georgetown Law Center from 2022.

Shaping Ghana’s development agenda

Speaking at the signing ceremony in Washington DC, Mr Dame expressed his delight at the opportunities the programme offered, saying they would further help enhance Ghana’s bar.

He said it was significant that Georgetown was not only famed for its tradition of training lawyers but had also made an impact on the Judiciary, the Legislature and the business world.

“Georgetown has had a relatively long tradition of training lawyers, since 1870. The quality of the training imparted by Georgetown is reflected in the soundness of the contribution by its alumni to the development of America and the world.

“It has produced alumni who have served and continue to serve in important offices of the Federal Government of the United States, the judiciary, the legislature, the business world and academia,” he said.

“I have no doubt that the richness of its Law Faculty will positively impact on the number of Ghanaian lawyers and law graduates to profit from this agreement,” the A-G intimated.

He also said the breadth of programmes the Georgetown Law Center offered would be of immense benefit to Ghana.

“The breadth of programmes the Georgetown Law Center offers is the most diverse in the United States. Courses such as international economic law, arbitration and dispute resolution, securities and financial regulation and national security law will be of immense assistance in the shaping of the developmental agenda of Ghana,” he stressed.

MORE:

• Tyrone Marghuy tops class in Science & Elective Maths despite admission woes

• V*ginal gas (flatulence): Why women queef during s3x and what to do about it

• Rihanna reaches out to 17-year-old Nigerian hawker who went viral

Functional legal system

The A-G also said the agreement was further proof of his desire to ensure that Ghana had a functional and relevant legal system that was good enough to meet the challenges of an emerging economy.

“This agreement is in furtherance of my desire to ensure that Ghana has a functional and relevant legal system capable of meeting the challenges of an emerging economy, and that lawyers are equipped with the skills required in a modern economy.

“In this regard, back home, the government has already taken significant steps with the massive increase in student admission to the Ghana Law School last year, coupled with the ongoing construction of the Law Village Complex, as well as the steady construction of a new 12-storey building for the Office of the A-G.

“I assure you of the quality of Ghanaian law graduates and lawyers to be selected for the pursuit of the programme. I believe the quality of the products will compel you to increase the scholarships to afford more Ghanaians the opportunity to pursue the programmes in the next few years,” Mr Dame said.

Prof. Treanor expressed his delight at the personal leadership of the A-G in the development of the programme and the signing of the agreement.

He expressed the hope that with the A-G’s leadership, further areas of cooperation with the Georgetown University Law Center, particularly in the training of judges, could be explored in the very near future.

The Dean of International and Graduate Programmes at the Georgetown University, Prof. Madhavi Sunder, who was also at the signing ceremony, expressed satisfaction with the partnership and hoped that it would be expanded in the near future to create more opportunities and benefits for Ghana and the Georgetown Law Center.

Scholarship Secretariat

Providing further details on the programme, the Registrar of the Scholarship Secretariat, Mr. Kingsley Agyemang, said Georgetown would provide a substantial amount of money to cater for the cost of tuition for the beneficiaries, while the secretariat would provide the remaining cost of tuition, as well as cater for the welfare of the students.

“Georgetown has agreed to fund a substantial part of the cost of tuition for students, while the government of Ghana will fund the rest, in addition to costs associated with our duty of care of Ghanaian students under our patronage.

“For this, we have the A-G to thank. His initiative has brought us to this point,” he indicated.

Georgetown University

The Georgetown University is a private university in Washington, DC.

It is the oldest Catholic and Jesuit higher educational institution in the US, founded in 1789 by John Carroll, the first Bishop and Archbishop of the US, in the national capital of the United States.

Famous alumni include two former US presidents, Bill Clinton and Lyndon Johnson, as well as several other Heads of State, including King Felipe VI of Spain and King Abdullah II of Jordan.