Martin Amidu, former Attorney General of Ghana, has leveled accusations of an “economic crime scene” relating to payroll practices within the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP). He contends that the OSP, established to combat corruption, is ironically harboring corrupt practices through the illegal employment of staff. Amidu alleges that numerous OSP employees lack official appointment letters, a direct violation of Article 195 of the 1992 Constitution and Section 21 of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959). This lack of proper documentation ostensibly renders their employment unlawful and their presence on the OSP payroll fraudulent. He further claims these individuals have not undergone the mandatory vetting process outlined in Regulation 7 of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2018 (LI 2373), nor have they completed probationary periods or received confirmation as required by Regulation 12 of the same Act. These combined irregularities, according to Amidu, constitute a significant breach of established procedures and contribute to an environment conducive to financial impropriety within the OSP itself.
Amidu’s accusations coincide with the recent directive from the National Entrepreneurship and Innovation Programme (NEIP) suspending its staff due to unresolved employment and salary issues. He criticizes the government’s focus on the NEIP situation while the OSP remains seemingly unchecked. Amidu directly addresses President John Dramani Mahama, urging him to prioritize the alleged OSP irregularities before addressing the NEIP matter. He argues that resolving the OSP situation would demonstrate Mahama’s genuine commitment to due process and combatting corruption, thereby establishing his credibility before taking action against the NEIP. Amidu frames the NEIP staff suspension as a potentially deceptive maneuver designed to divert attention from the more serious payroll issues within the OSP. He posits that addressing a less controversial issue first creates a facade of action while allowing the more deeply rooted problem within the OSP to persist unaddressed.
The core of Amidu’s argument rests on the principle of equal treatment under the law. He highlights the seeming disparity between the government’s swift action against NEIP employees and its inaction regarding the alleged irregularities at the OSP. He questions the rationale behind suspending NEIP staff to ensure adherence to due process while simultaneously overlooking similar, potentially more egregious, violations within the OSP. This perceived double standard, according to Amidu, undermines the government’s stated commitment to fighting corruption and upholding the rule of law. He argues that tackling the alleged OSP irregularities first would demonstrate a genuine commitment to principle and build public trust in the government’s anti-corruption agenda.
Amidu challenges President Mahama to confront the alleged “economic crime scene” at the OSP to demonstrate his integrity and commitment to the promises made during his election campaign. He emphasizes the importance of consistent application of the law, irrespective of political affiliations. Amidu reminds President Mahama of his oath of office and the expectation that he will not selectively prosecute political opponents while overlooking similar offenses committed by individuals within his own political circle. This, Amidu argues, is crucial for maintaining public trust and ensuring the impartial application of justice. The timing of the NEIP staff suspension, shortly after a favorable decision from the OSP regarding President Mahama, adds another layer to Amidu’s critique. He suggests that the timing raises suspicions about the government’s motives and reinforces the perception of selective justice.
Amidu’s call for action extends beyond simply addressing the alleged payroll irregularities. He urges President Mahama to seize the opportunity at the beginning of his tenure to reaffirm his commitment to upholding ethical standards and combating corruption without bias. By prioritizing the resolution of the OSP situation, Amidu believes Mahama can set a precedent for transparent and impartial governance. He underscores the need for equal treatment of all individuals, regardless of their political affiliations, and the importance of applying the law consistently to maintain public trust. Amidu warns that failing to address these issues could undermine the credibility of the OSP and, by extension, the government’s entire anti-corruption agenda.
In essence, Martin Amidu’s accusations paint a picture of potential hypocrisy within the Ghanaian government’s approach to tackling corruption. While outwardly addressing employment irregularities within the NEIP, he alleges a more serious “economic crime scene” is being overlooked within the very institution designed to combat such crimes. He calls on President Mahama to demonstrate his commitment to transparency and accountability by prioritizing the investigation and resolution of these alleged OSP irregularities. This, Amidu argues, is not just a matter of legal compliance but a crucial step towards building public confidence in the government’s integrity and its stated commitment to combating corruption. He emphasizes that true justice requires impartial application of the law, regardless of political affiliation, and warns that selective enforcement only serves to erode public trust and undermine the fight against corruption.
