BY ISSAH OLEGOR
A United States Immigration Court has delivered what could become one of the most controversial legal setbacks for the anti-corruption campaign after an immigration judge ruled that the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) failed to present persuasive evidence linking former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta to criminal wrongdoing during proceedings that determined his immigration status in the United States.
The decision, delivered by Immigration Judge David A. Gardey at the Annandale Immigration Court in Virginia on June 15, 2026, has intensified the international legal battle between Ghanaian authorities and the former Finance Minister, who has been fighting efforts to return him to Ghana to face corruption-related charges.
The ruling followed a contested immigration hearing in which the United States Department of Homeland Security opposed Ofori-Atta’s application for adjustment of status, arguing that the numerous criminal charges filed against him in Ghana should prevent him from obtaining lawful permanent residence in the United States.
However, after reviewing the evidence presented before the immigration court, Judge Gardey ruled in favour of Ofori-Atta, granting his application for adjustment of status and questioning the evidentiary basis of the criminal allegations relied upon during the immigration proceedings.
According to the certified transcript of the proceedings noted, the immigration court examined whether Ofori-Atta had engaged in criminal misconduct connected to the Strategic Mobilisation Limited (SML) revenue assurance contract, one of the principal investigations pursued by Ghana’s Office of the Special Prosecutor.
The OSP had presented a more than 200-page affidavit together with criminal charges comprising more than 70 counts alleging corruption, abuse of office and related offences against the former Finance Minister.
Judge Gardey said the court had carefully examined the affidavit but was unable, within the context of the immigration proceedings, to identify persuasive evidence supporting the allegations.
“The court carefully reviewed the Office of the Special Prosecutor’s affidavit and finds that the affidavit is lacking in any persuasive proof or evidence that the respondent has engaged in any criminal wrongdoing… or that the respondent personally profited from his work as a government official in Ghana,” the judge stated.
The court further observed that the absence of persuasive evidence itself was significant in evaluating the case before it.
“The lack of any persuasive evidence indicating any kind of criminal wrongdoing or criminal conspiracy involving the respondent in the OSP’s affidavit is powerful evidence. The respondent has not been credibly charged or credibly shown to engage in any wrongdoing in Ghana.”
Judge Gardey also criticized the nature of the allegations contained in the affidavit, describing them as largely conclusory.
“The OSP affidavit is full of conclusory allegations without any description of credible or reliable facts that would indicate any kind of criminal wrongdoing by the respondent,” the court stated.
By contrast, the judge found that Ofori-Atta’s testimony during the immigration hearing was credible. According to the ruling, the former Finance Minister consistently denied receiving money or personal benefits from any entity connected to the investigations and maintained that he never profited from decisions taken while serving in public office.
The immigration court also attached significance to the earlier decision of the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files (CCF), which removed the Red Notice issued against Ofori-Atta after reviewing Ghana’s request.
During the proceedings, INTERPOL expert Dr. Ted Bromund testified regarding the Commission’s findings.
The court noted that the CCF had deleted the Red Notice after determining that the matter was predominantly political under INTERPOL’s rules, a conclusion the immigration judge considered relevant in assessing the evidence presented before the American court.
Another issue examined by the court was the independent review conducted by KPMG at the request of the Government of Ghana into the SML contract.
According to the judgment, the KPMG report identified operational inefficiencies and recommended improvements but did not conclude that Ofori-Atta or officials under him had engaged in criminal conduct.
The immigration judge also commented on the efforts to extradite the former Finance Minister.
The ruling noted that although the United States Department of Justice had been in possession of the extradition request for a considerable period, no extradition complaint had been filed before an American court.
Judge Gardey remarked that the absence of such action was consistent with the court’s own assessment of the evidence presented during the proceedings.
“The lack of any criminal complaint for purposes of extradition indicates that the Department of Justice also has trouble finding any indication of any credible claims of criminal wrongdoing by the respondent,” the court observed.
During the hearing, Ofori-Atta’s attorney, Mr. Qasimi, argued that the prosecution was politically motivated and intended to target his client rather than uncover genuine criminal conduct.
He told the court that the charges were filed shortly after INTERPOL suspended the Red Notice and further pointed to a pending constitutional case before Ghana’s Supreme Court concerning aspects of the Office of the Special Prosecutor’s prosecutorial authority.
Lawyers representing the United States Department of Homeland Security rejected those arguments, maintaining that questions surrounding the constitutional status of the OSP were separate from the factual allegations under consideration.
Nevertheless, after reviewing the documentary evidence and witness testimony, Judge Gardey concluded that Ofori-Atta had not been credibly shown to have participated in criminal wrongdoing.
The court also considered humanitarian and discretionary factors before granting lawful permanent resident status.
Judge Gardey noted that Ofori-Atta had studied and worked in the United States for many years, including employment with Morgan Stanley and Salomon Brothers.
The court further considered his ongoing cancer treatment, his family ties in the United States, including a U.S. citizen son, and the hardship he experienced while detained by immigration authorities.
“The court finds that the positive equities far outweigh the negative equities such that the court will exercise its discretion and grant the respondent’s request for adjustment of status,” Judge Gardey ruled.
Addressing the former Finance Minister directly, the judge acknowledged the difficulties he had endured during the proceedings.
“I know that you’ve been through a difficult period of time, that you were detained based on these criminal charges… your health suffered as a result… you have had your day in court, and you have established that you are entitled to adjustment of status.”
The decision represents a significant development in Ofori-Atta’s legal battle in the United States. However, it does not itself determine the criminal charges pending against him in Ghana.
The Office of the Special Prosecutor has consistently maintained that the merits of its case can only be determined by Ghanaian courts and has argued that the immigration proceedings addressed U.S. immigration law rather than the ultimate question of criminal liability under Ghanaian law.
The ruling nevertheless presents a major legal and diplomatic challenge for the ongoing efforts to extradite the former Finance Minister, whose case has become one of the most closely watched corruption prosecutions in the country’s recent history.
