In a major legal challenge to the autonomy of the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP), the Deputy Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, has asserted that the office lacks the constitutional authority to initiate criminal proceedings on its own.
Speaking on Channel One TV’s The Point of View with Bernard Avle on Monday, April 20, 2026, Dr. Srem-Sai argued that the OSP Act (Act 959) does not "authorize" the office in the way many believe. He stated, "I do not believe that the Act authorizes the OSP... There is nothing there which says that the OSP is hereby authorized."
The "Authorization" Dispute (April 2026)
Dr. Srem-Sai’s comments follow a landmark High Court ruling on April 15, 2026, which ordered the Attorney-General's Department to take over all criminal cases currently being handled by the OSP.
Executive Instrument (E.I.) Absence: Dr. Srem-Sai contended that there is no specific Executive Instrument or constitutional provision that bypasses Article 88 of the Constitution, which vests all prosecutorial powers solely in the Attorney-General.
The "Natural Person" Argument: The Deputy A-G has filed processes at the Supreme Court seeking to strike down Section 4(2) of the OSP Act.
Global Precedent: Srem-Sai urged Ghanaians to look at other common law jurisdictions where similar friction exists, arguing that the OSP must operate as an investigative wing that feeds into the A-G's office, rather than a parallel prosecution service.
Impact on High-Profile Cases
The Deputy A-G's stance effectively "clips the wings" of the OSP regarding several ongoing cases, including the prosecution of Peter Archibold Hyde, Alhaji Seidu, and James Keck Osei. These individuals are accused of conspiring to seize containers using forged documents purportedly from the Office of the Vice President.
| Stakeholder | Position |
| Attorney-General's Dept | Insists OSP must seek formal, case-by-case authorization for every prosecution. |
| Office of the Special Prosecutor | Rejects the court ruling; argues Act 959 provides an independent mandate and is challenging the decision. |
| The High Court | Ruled that while the OSP can investigate, it cannot prosecute without the A-G's express approval. |
0 Comments