 does not possess the independent authority to prosecute criminal cases, directing that all such matters be referred to the Attorney-General’s Department.){kind=link}
An Accra High Court has ruled that the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) does not possess the independent authority to prosecute criminal cases, directing that all such matters be referred to the Attorney-General’s Department.
The decision, delivered on Wednesday by Justice John Eugene Nyadu Nyante, has cast significant doubt over ongoing prosecutions initiated by the anti-corruption body, effectively placing them on hold pending further legal clarification.
In his ruling, Justice Nyante held that while the OSP is legally empowered to investigate corruption-related offences, it lacks the constitutional mandate to independently initiate prosecutions. The court relied on Article 88 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, which vests prosecutorial authority exclusively in the Attorney-General.
The judgment followed a quo warranto application filed by Peter Achibold Hyde, who challenged the legal basis of the OSP’s prosecutorial role.
In a swift response, the OSP criticised the ruling, arguing that the High Court had exceeded its jurisdiction. In a statement issued shortly after the decision, the office indicated it had begun processes to challenge the ruling at a higher court.
“The OSP states that it is taking steps to quickly overturn the decision of the General Jurisdiction Court since the High Court does not have jurisdiction to, in effect, strike down parts of an Act of Parliament as unconstitutional. It is only the Supreme Court which can strike down parts of an Act of Parliament as unconstitutional,” the statement said.
The High Court’s decision comes amid an ongoing case before the Supreme Court of Ghana, which is already examining the constitutionality of the OSP’s prosecutorial mandate.
The case, filed by Noah Ephraem Tetteh Adamtey, seeks a determination on whether Parliament acted within constitutional bounds in granting the OSP authority to independently prosecute corruption-related offences.
Notably, the Attorney-General’s office has aligned with the plaintiff’s argument, suggesting in its submissions that provisions enabling the OSP to initiate prosecutions without prior authorisation may be inconsistent with Article 88.