Can Ken Ofori-Atta evade Ghanaian prosecution with a U.S. passport under international law and jurisdiction?
The recent declaration of Ghana’s former Finance Minister, Ken Ofori-Atta, as a fugitive by the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and his subsequent placement on Interpol’s Red Notice list has sparked heated debate among Ghanaians.
Accused of using public office for personal gain, Ofori-Atta is under investigation for alleged corruption tied to high-profile contracts, including the controversial National Cathedral project and a revenue assurance deal with Strategic Mobilisation
Ghana Ltd.
His legal team claims he is receiving medical treatment abroad.
This article examines whether obtaining U.S. citizenship could shield Ofori-Atta from Ghanaian justice, analyzing the
issue through the lens of international law and jurisdictional principles.
The Interpol Red Notice and Its Implications
An Interpol Red Notice is a request to law enforcement agencies worldwide to locate and provisionally detain a person pending extradition, surrender, or similar legal action.
It is not an international arrest warrant but serves as a powerful tool for international police cooperation, alerting Interpol’s 196 member countries to a suspect’s status.
In Ofori-Atta’s case, the Red Notice was issued on June 6, 2025, following his failure to appear before an OSP investigative panel, despite assurances from his legal team that he would comply after medical treatment abroad.
The OSP, led by Special Prosecutor Kissi Agyebeng, insists on his physical presence in Ghana, rejecting requests for virtual interrogation due to the gravity of the allegations.
The charges against Ofori-Atta, including “using public office for profit,” stem from his tenure as Finance Minister from 2017 to 2024.
The OSP’s pursuit signals Ghana’s commitment to combating corruption, but Ofori-Atta’s absence—reportedly in the United States for medical reasons—has fueled speculation that he is seeking to avoid prosecution.
Can a U.S. passport shield Ofori-Atta from prosecution?
The notion that obtaining a U.S. passport could protect Ofori-Atta from Ghanaian prosecution hinges on principles of international law, jurisdiction, and extradition.
Let’s break this down:
1. Jurisdiction and Nationality
Under international law, jurisdiction refers to a state’s authority to enforce its laws over individuals and activities.
Ghana has territorial jurisdiction over crimes committed within its borders, including the alleged corruption during Ofori-Atta’s tenure.
As a Ghanaian citizen at the time of the alleged offenses, Ofori-Atta is subject to Ghana’s criminal justice system, regardless of his current location or any newcitizenship he might acquire.
Obtaining U.S. citizenship would not automatically negate Ghana’s jurisdiction. International law recognizes that states retain the right to prosecute their nationals for crimes committed within their territory, even if the individual acquires another nationality.
The principle of active personality jurisdiction allows Ghana to pursue Ofori-Atta as a former national, particularly for serious crimes like corruption. Moreover, the offenses in question—alleged misuse of public office—are tied to Ghana’s sovereignty, reinforcing its legal authority to seek his prosecution.
2. Extradition and U.S. Citizenship
Extradition is the process by which one country surrenders a person to another for prosecution or to serve a sentence. Ghana and the United States have an extradition treaty, signed in 2010, which facilitates the transfer of fugitives for serious crimes, including corruption-related offenses.
However, U.S. citizenship could complicate extradition in practice, though not necessarily prevent it.
The U.S. does not have a strict policy against extraditing its citizens, but extradition requests are subject to rigorous scrutiny.
The U.S. Department of State and federal courts evaluate whether the requesting country’s charges meet the treaty’s requirements, such as the principle of dual criminality (the offense must be a crime in both countries). Corruption and abuse of public office are recognized as extraditable offenses under the treaty, as they align with U.S. laws on fraud and public corruption.
However, Ofori-Atta’s legal team could argue against extradition on several grounds:
• Medical Grounds: His lawyers have submitted medical records claiming he is unwell, potentially arguing that extradition would endanger his health. While this may delay proceedings, it is unlikely to permanently block extradition unless the condition is exceptionally severe and verifiable.
• Political Persecution: Ofori-Atta could claim that the charges are politically motivated, especially given the timing under a new administration led by President John Mahama, a political rival of Ofori-Atta’s former party, the New Patriotic Party (NPP). Interpol’s constitution prohibits Red Notices for politically motivated cases, and U.S. courts may refuse extradition if they deem the prosecution to be politically driven. However, the OSP’s detailed allegations, including specific contracts and financial mismanagement, suggest a focus on ordinary-law crimes, which weakens this defense.
• Human Rights Concerns: If Ofori-Atta argues that he faces unfair treatment or human rights violations in Ghana, U.S. authorities might hesitate to extradite. Yet, Ghana’s judicial system is generally regarded as independent, and Ofori-Atta’s prior lawsuit against the OSP for unlawful treatment was not upheld, undermining this argument.
Even if Ofori-Atta were to obtain U.S. citizenship, the extradition treaty would still apply. U.S. courts have historically approved extradition of citizens in cases involving serious crimes, provided due process is followed. For example, the U.S. has extradited its citizens to face corruption charges in other countries when evidence is compelling and treaty conditions are met.
3. Interpol’s role and limitations
Interpol’s Red Notice significantly restricts Ofori-Atta’s ability to travel freely, as any of the 196 member countries could detain him upon identification.
However, Interpol does not have the authority to compel extradition; that decision rests with the country where the fugitive is located— in this case, potentially the U.S. Interpol’s rules also require that Red Notices comply with its constitution, which forbids actions based on political, military, religious, or racial motives.
The OSP’s request appears to meet Interpol’s criteria, as it focuses on corruption, a serious ordinary-law crime.
If Ofori-Atta is indeed in the U.S., Ghana must formally request extradition through diplomatic channels, providing evidence of the charges. The U.S. would then assess the request under its legal framework, balancing treaty obligations with protections for its citizens (if Ofori-Atta acquires citizenship).
4. Practical Challenges of Obtaining U.S. Citizenship
The speculation that Ofori-Atta is seeking a U.S. passport to evade prosecution overlooks the practical difficulties of obtaining citizenship quickly. U.S. citizenship typically requires years of legal residency, a process that cannot be expedited to the timeline of the OSP’s investigation.
Naturalization involves a minimum of five years of permanent residency (three if married to a U.S. citizen), followed by a rigorous application process, including background checks. Even if Ofori-Atta has ties to the U.S. (e.g., through prior residence or family), acquiring citizenship in time to impact his chase is highly improbable.
Alternatively, if he already holds dual citizenship (Ghanaian and American), this would not automatically shield him from extradition, as the U.S. evaluates extradition requests based on evidence and treaty obligations, not solely citizenship status.
There is no public evidence confirming Ofori-Atta’s current citizenship status beyond his Ghanaian nationality, and his legal
team’s focus on medical treatment suggests he is not relying on citizenship as a defense.
Conclusion: Can he escape prosecution?
Under international law and jurisdictional principles, obtaining a U.S. passport would not provide Ken Ofori-Atta with a foolproof shield against Ghanaian prosecution.
Ghana retains jurisdiction over crimes committed within its borders, and the U.S.-Ghana extradition treaty facilitates
cooperation in cases of serious crimes like corruption. While U.S. citizenship could complicate extradition by adding procedural hurdles, it does not inherently prevent it.
The Interpol Red Notice ensures global scrutiny, limiting Ofori-Atta’s ability to evade detection, and the practical timeline for acquiring U.S. citizenship makes this an unlikely escape route.
The case underscores broader issues of accountability, international cooperation, and public trust in Ghana’s anti-corruption efforts. Whether Ofori-Atta returns voluntarily, is extradited, or faces trial in absentia, the outcome will have significant implications for Ghana’s legal and political landscape.
For now, the OSP’s pursuit demonstrates that no individual, regardless of status or location, is beyond the reach of justice—at least in theory.
Writer's email: Gilbertattipoe90@gmail.com
