BY Daniel Bampoe
The Minority in Parliament has intensified pressure on the Majority Leadership, demanding the immediate resignation of Majority Leader Mahama Ayariga and Majority Chief Whip Rockson Nelson Dafeamekpor following the withdrawal of a controversial bill aimed at repealing the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP).
The call underscores deep political tensions over the management of the anti-corruption architecture and the balance of parliamentary authority.
The Bill That Sparked The Crisis
On December 8, 2025, Ayariga and Dafeamekpor sponsored the Office of the Special Prosecutor (Repeal) Bill, 2025, which sought to abolish Act 959, effectively dissolving the OSP and transferring its functions to the Attorney-General’s office.
The move immediately generated national debate, as it appeared to challenge the independence of one of the key anti-corruption institutions.
The Minority, through a statement signed by First Deputy Minority Whip Habib Iddrisu, described the initiative as “unauthorized, ill-conceived, and a serious breach of trust.”
They criticized the parliamentary leadership for acting in apparent contradiction to President John Dramani Mahama’s earlier public endorsement of the OSP as a vital anti-corruption body.
Presidential Intervention And Policy Reversal
Two days after the bill was introduced, President Mahama publicly reaffirmed the importance of the OSP, describing it as a “vital cog in the fight against corruption” and urging the institution to do more to restore public confidence.
Following this, the Presidency announced on December 11 that the President had directed the withdrawal of the repeal bill.
The Minority framed this presidential action as a public repudiation of the parliamentary leadership, arguing that it confirmed the initiative by Mahama Ayariga and Dafeamekpor was inconsistent with government policy.
Timing And Political Implications
The Minority also raised concerns over the timing of the repeal attempt.
They pointed out that the bill followed closely after the arrest of Martin Kpebu, a prominent critic of the OSP, and coincided with a Supreme Court challenge to Act 959 announced on social media by Deputy Attorney-General Justice Srem Sai.
According to the Minority, the convergence of these events raised questions about whether the repeal attempt and the court challenge were part of a coordinated effort to undermine the independence of the OSP.
They contrasted this with the treatment of the office under the previous New Patriotic Party (NPP) government, noting that the OSP was allowed to operate independently even when its investigations caused political discomfort to the party.
Criticism Of Majority Leadership
The Minority characterized the actions of Ayariga and Dafeamekpor as either gross incompetence or deliberate insubordination, asserting that such conduct demonstrated unfitness for leadership roles.
They argued that the episode had weakened prosecutorial independence, damaged the anti-corruption credibility, and raised serious concerns about democratic governance.
In their view, the continued tenure of the Majority Leader and Chief Whip undermines public confidence in Parliament’s leadership.
They stated that resignation is necessary to restore policy coherence, protect the independence of anti-corruption institutions, and uphold the rule of law.
Historical Context And Institutional Stakes
The Office of the Special Prosecutor was established in 2017 under the NPP administration as an independent prosecutorial body with the mandate to investigate and prosecute corruption-related offences.
Its creation was widely lauded as a progressive step toward strengthening accountability in public office.
Over the years, the OSP has faced challenges, including delays in completing high-profile investigations and resistance from some political quarters.
Despite these challenges, its independence has remained a key pillar of Ghana’s anti-corruption framework.
The recent attempt by the Majority Caucus to repeal its establishing law, therefore, struck at the heart of both institutional independence and public perception of governmental commitment to fighting corruption.
