By Daniel Bampoe
A new institutional standoff has emerged between the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and the Office of the Attorney-General (AG) over the extradition and prosecution of former Finance Minister, Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori-Atta, who is being investigated for alleged corruption and abuse of office during his tenure between 2017 and 2024.
The controversy began when the Special Prosecutor, Kissi Agyebeng, wrote to the Office of the President — specifically the Jubilee House — in early June 2025, seeking executive assistance to initiate extradition processes for the former minister, who is believed to be outside the jurisdiction.
In his letter dated June 2, 2025, the OSP requested that the Presidency facilitate the legal mechanisms for the “provisional apprehension and extradition” of Ofori-Atta to Ghana to face corruption-related charges.
However, the Jubilee House, while acknowledging receipt of the request, reportedly redirected the OSP to the Attorney-General’s Department, stating that its constitutional mandate did not extend to prosecutorial functions.
The Presidency therefore advised that the OSP liaise with the Attorney-General to carry out the necessary extradition procedures in accordance with the legal framework and international cooperation laws.
Following this referral, the Attorney-General, Dominic Ayine, through his deputy, Justice Srem-Sai, responded to the OSP’s letter by asking for collaboration.
In a letter dated June 13, 2025, the AG’s Office requested that the OSP provide two investigators to join a joint task force with the Ministry of Justice to pursue the extradition.
Additionally, the AG formally asked the OSP to submit the complete case docket and any available investigative report on Ken Ofori-Atta to facilitate the legal processes.
The OSP, in a subsequent reply dated June 20, 2025, nominated two of its senior officers — Director Albert Akurugu of the Asset Recovery and Management Division and Senior Prosecutor Kaiser Francis Amedome Wilson — to join the AG’s team.
However, the OSP’s letter conspicuously omitted the key documents requested by the Attorney-General — particularly the case docket and investigative report.
This omission prompted the Attorney-General to follow up with a reminder on September 3, 2025, signed by Deputy AG Justice Srem-Sai, again requesting the OSP to provide “a copy of the docket (in its current state), an investigative report (even if interim), and any other relevant information” on Ofori-Atta to enable the AG’s office to make urgent law enforcement decisions.
Despite this formal follow-up, the OSP has reportedly not complied with the date request, raising questions about the real intentions behind its earlier actions.
This stalemate has drawn public attention and criticism from legal observers who believe that the OSP’s refusal to share the docket undermines its stated objective of ensuring accountability and fighting corruption.
Critics argue that if the OSP genuinely seeks to have Ofori-Atta extradited and prosecuted, it should not withhold vital evidence from the AG, whose constitutional role includes leading all criminal prosecutions on behalf of the state.
Over the years, the OSP has faced accusations of “weaponizing investigations” — often announcing high-profile probes that stall once they come under its jurisdiction, thereby preventing other investigative or prosecutorial bodies from taking over.
“The moment the OSP takes over a case, it often goes cold,” one senior legal analyst observed, adding that the current standoff mirrors a recurring pattern where politically sensitive cases end up unprosecuted.
As things stand, the future of the Ken Ofori-Atta case remains uncertain.
While the Attorney-General’s office appears ready to move forward with extradition efforts, the OSP’s reluctance to hand over the full docket continues to delay progress.
