The Speaker of Parliament, Alban Sumana Kingsford Bagbin, as well as members of Parliament have unanimously agreed to a recommendation for the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) to be abolished.
They said since its establishment eight years ago, Parliament had approved huge budgets for the OSP yet it had failed to show any achievement in terms of fighting corruption.
They were of the strong conviction that if the Attorney-General’s Department was adequately resourced, it would be equipped to curb corruption and prosecute corrupt government and public officials.
They, therefore, proposed the need for a private members’ bill to be initiated or the Executive sponsoring a bill for the House to work on for possible scrapping of the OSP.
Why agreement?
The House agreed to the scrapping of the OSP after the Majority Leader, Mahama Ayariga, had informed the House about the arrest and detention of a private legal practitioner, Martin Kpebu, on Wednesday.
He said Mr Kpebu had publicly criticised the manner in which the Special Prosecutor, Kissi Agyebeng, was going about performing his functions.
He said Mr Kpebu was invited and at the entrance to the OSP, he sought to address the media, which was objected to by the security detail at the office.
With some altercation ensuing between Mr Kpebu and the security responsible for the building that housed the OSP, an order was given that he should be detained.
He said it took the intervention of most Ghanaians on social media and people calling Special Prosecutor and demanding that he should release the legal practitioner.
“So Mr Speaker, so lawyer Martin Kpebu was subsequently released last night but it raises fundamental issues about the very existence of that office,” he said.
Read also: OSP accuses Martin Kpebu of obstructing probe
‘I opposed OSP establishment’
He recalled vividly that when the proposal to establish the OSP was presented, he opposed it.
He said he took a position that the OSP was unconstitutional and stripped the Attorney-General (A-G) of the power to be responsible for the prosecution of criminal cases.
He said the act that Parliament had to struggle and nuanced the whole Special Prosecutor’s process clearly betrayed the fact that “we knew we were doing something that did not sit well with our constitutional architecture”.
Let’s abolish OSP
He pointed out that OSP had been in existence for close to eight years but there was nothing to show for its achievement.
“I cannot see my way clear in terms of the achievement of that office and I have consistently held the position that fighting corruption is not about littering the place with institutions.
“It is the political commitment of those who lead that fight against corruption and not the designation of the institutions that have been established,” Mr Ayariga said.
He also said he believed that it was high time Parliament reconsidered its decision to approve the establishment of the OSP.
“I honestly think we should abolish it because we have experimented it and we cannot see any achievements.
“There are major cases of clear corruption but up till date the office has not been able to do anything,” he said.
Mr Ayariga argued that if the institution of the A-G, established in Constitution, was adequately resourced and protected by Parliament as well as held accountable by Parliament, he believed that office would equally deliver.
Saying that the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice was the only office established by the Constitution to fight corruption, he urged Parliament to ensure that it was resourced and protected so that “it stands above ordinary ministries and can ensure that criminality is dealt with in this country”.
“If we agree that a prosecutor fighting corruption needs to be resourced, why have we not been resourcing the Attorney-General?
“Why do we establish an entity out of the functions of the A-General and resource them more than the A-G and even after doing that, it has still not delivered,” he said.
He reminded the House of the recommendation by the former Speaker of Parliament, Professor Mike Oquaye, for Parliament to abolish the OSP through the use of a private member's bill.
“Mr Speaker, let me sound a warning that abolishing it will not let off the hook anybody that is culpable and who has violated the laws of Ghana when it comes to financial accountability.
“I can assure you people should not see the court for the abolition of the Office of Special Prosecutor as an indication that those who are going to be held accountable will be let off the hook,” he said.
The Bawku MP added that it was high time Ghanaians and MPs realised that the constitutional experiment to set up the OSP was futile.
Weaponising powers
Supporting the call for the Special Prosecutor to appear before the House, the Minority MP for Ofoase/Ayirebi, Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, said he would have wished that the Business Committee had properly programmed the invitation of the Special Prosecutor “so that it would have been part of the earlier conversations”.
Describing the concerns of the Majority Chief Whip as an important matter, he said the matter was not entirely about the Office of the Special Prosecutor.
He said it was about a culture that had crept into the investigative and law enforcement bodies in the country.
We’re not getting results
Adding his voice, the Speaker also recalled that during the deliberation on the OSP in the House, he himself and a number of MPs stated on the floor there was no constitutional basis.
“But we wanted to signal to the world that we are going to fight corruption and at the end of the day, we have seen the results.
“And we cannot continue to allocate that huge sum to the same office when we are not getting the results,” he said.
Urging the need for the House to face the bull by the horns, Mr Bagbin said it was time the right thing was done,” he said, agreeing with the Majority Leader’s call for the OSP to be abolished.
Urging the House to be honest in deliberating the issue, Mr Bagbin said the act of investigative bodies arresting and detaining cuts across all the regimes and all security agencies.
“They think that when somebody is invited, the person is arrested and the law is very clear on this matter.
“So please, let us not bring partisanship into it and let us look at it as we have all experienced it over the years and try to prescribe the way forward,” he said.
