OSP, A Haunted House?

Kissi Agyebeng 

If the people be led by laws, and uniformity among them be sought by punishments, they will try to escape punishment and have no sense of shame. If they are led by virtue, and uniformity sought among them through the practice of ritual propriety, they will possess a sense of shame and come to you of their own accord.

Confucius: The Analects 2, 3.

You may have seen the three wise monkeys by the Chinese Confucius under whom is written, “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” or you may give the monkeys Japanese names: Mi-zaru, Kika-zaru, Iwa-zaru (Not seeing, not hearing, not speaking). Perhaps there was a fourth monkey: Do no evil. And Archer Taylor noticed a “ballade” of 1392 with the motto, “Pour vivre en paix il faut etre aveugle, sourd et muet” (To live in peace one must be blind, deaf and dumb). Surely, Proverbs 17:27 admonishes us, “He that hath knowledge, spareth his words.”

Or you may have watched the film, ‘No one gets out alive’ by Adam Nevill, in which Stephanie, an undocumented immigrant looking for a cheap place to rent comes upon 82 Edgehill Road, Cleveland and gets entrapped by circumstances. You may detest ‘Dracula’ the magnum opus of the Irish author, Bram Stoker, in which Dracula is shown as a vampire who enjoys human blood. And, gee, you may get scared by “Frankenstein” authored by Mary Shelling.

Go back to the basics: the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959), the name that pops up is Martin Amidu who because on his own he fought corruption, was appointed in January 2018, and the President Nana Addo touted the ‘gargantuan’ man’s anti-corruption fight as the reason for this appointment. Martin Alamisi Amidu v The Attorney-General Waterville Holdings (Woyome) – the high-profile case on corruption.

But in November 2020, Amidu sent a letter of resignation to the President, citing the ‘meddling’ of the President in his investigations that “convinces me beyond every reasonable doubt that you had laboured under the mistaken belief that I could hold the Office of Special Prosecutor as a ‘poodle’, and that I was resigning because of the ‘lack of respect of the independence of my office’. That broke the camel’s back; the reaction from the Presidency in respect to the analysis of the risk of corruption assessment of the Agyapa Royalties Limited transaction.

Here was a man in whom the president had expressed belief in his integrity, competence, courage, independence of character and public spiritedness. The President said, “I, thus, have the honour to submit to Parliament when it reconvenes, the name of Martin Alamisi Burnes Kaiser Amidu, for its approval for appointment as Special Prosecutor. It is my hope and expectation that the praiseworthy speed and dispatch with which Parliament acted on my nominees for ministerial appointment last year, will characterise its handling of this nomination to enable Mr. Amidu, as soon as possible, enter into office to begin the important work that awaits him.”

Then, Amidu in a 27-page rebuttal to allegations which were leveled against him by the Presidency following his resignation as Special Prosecutor charged, “I resigned my position as the Special Prosecutor because of the traumatic experience I suffered from the reaction of the President who breached his Presidential oath by unlawfully obstructing me from taking any further steps on the Agyapa Royalties Transactions from October 20, 2020 to November 1, 2020.

“When I met the President on October 23, 2020, I received the shock of my life when he demanded that I took no further action on the Agyapa transaction anti-corruption assessment report. That was when it was divinely revealed to me that the President whom I trusted so much for integrity only looked like the innocent flower of anti-corruption but he was really the mother corruption serpent under the innocent looking flower.”

Then, Kissi Agyebeng, stepped into the shoes of Martin Amidu. Kwame Tetteh, our law lecturer had taught us that when one’s case is thrown out by the trial court, he could go on appeal, to the Court of Appeal, then to the Supreme Court, and even at the Supreme Court, one could apply for a review. Rule eight of the Court of Appeal Rules states (1) Any appeal to the court shall be by way of re-hearing, and shall be brought by a notice referred to in these rules as ‘the notice of appeal’.

But Kissi Agyebeng may have had good reason for resorting to a press conference. He was upbeat about the ‘dismissive’ attitude of some judges. “Indeed, I have had several calls from well-meaning lawyers admonishing me that they have heard talk that our friends who have been elevated to the Bench and presiding over cases in court do not take very kindly to criticism… and that if the office persists in the media releases, the judges will gang up against the office and throw out all our cases,” he stated.

Four cases featured in the press conference: Charles Bissue, former presidential staffer; Cecilia Dapaah, former Sanitation Minister: Col. Kwadwo Damoah, former Commissioner of Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority; and the late Kwadwo Owusu-Afriyie a.k.a. Sir John.

For Charles Bissue, the court’s grant of injunction against his arrest meant suspects could now run to court to avoid arrest. The refusal of the court to confirm the seizure of Cecilia Dapaah’s property had the capability to scuttle the OSP’s investigation, and had the potential of ‘erecting a barrier preventing the OSP from investigating the matter’.

In the Damoah case, the OSP stated that the decision by the court to prohibit the OSP from further investigating the Customs officials indicated that the court had granted the persons immunity from investigations and prosecution, and this position was alien to the laws of Ghana.

In the Sir John’s case, the OSP said it was unfortunate the court did not grant the freezing order on Sir John’s property because he had died. His argument was that that could pave the way for persons to amass wealth corruptly and pass some corruptly-acquired property to some persons.

Meanwhile, the OSP, by the Office of Prosecutor Act 2017 (Act 959) has a wide mandate to investigate and prosecute cases of alleged corruption under the Public Procurement Act 2003 Act 663, and also other corruption-related offences implicating public officers, political office holders and their accomplices under the Criminal Offences Act 1960 (Act 29). Besides, the office is mandated to trace, recover and manage the proceeds of corruption. Section 2 of the Act states: The object of the office is to (a) investigate and prosecute specific cases of alleged or suspected corruption and corruption-related offences (b) recover the proceeds of corruption and corruption-related offences, and (c) take steps to prevent corruption.

The OSP intimates, “… it seems to us that the flagship public agency created by law to fight corruption should receive better regard, and consideration by the courts and not the developing trend of dismissiveness and regression without regard to its governing enactments, and certainly not the rection of non-existent hurdles in its work and operations.”

The song: “Akwanoma, mede me bere abo afodee, meye dee metumi, me mmere so a na meko” was well-chosen. Fighting corruption in a corruption-infested country like Ghana? A gargantuan task!

[email protected]

By Africanus Owusu-Ansah

 

The post OSP, A Haunted House? appeared first on DailyGuide Network.

Read Full Story