The ongoing legal battle between former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta and the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) has sparked controversy and accusations of political vendetta. At the heart of the dispute lies the OSP’s investigation into allegations of corruption against Ofori-Atta, culminating in an INTERPOL Red Notice and the designation of Ofori-Atta as a fugitive from justice. The former minister’s family vehemently denies the accusations, claiming the OSP’s actions are politically motivated, procedurally flawed, and based on manipulated evidence. However, Member of Parliament Mohammed Adams Sukparu argues that the situation stems from Ofori-Atta’s lack of cooperation with the OSP’s investigation.
Sukparu contends that if Ofori-Atta and his family had been transparent and cooperative from the outset, the current legal impasse could have been avoided. He emphasizes that the OSP operates based on received petitions and complaints, not on personal vendettas. In this case, the OSP is acting upon submitted corruption-related allegations against Ofori-Atta, fulfilling its constitutional mandate to combat corruption. This perspective contrasts sharply with the Ofori-Atta family’s narrative, which portrays the OSP as pursuing a personal vendetta against the former minister.
The Ofori-Atta family has launched a multi-pronged defense against the OSP’s actions. They have publicly condemned the INTERPOL Red Notice, characterizing it as an abuse of power and a breach of national and international legal standards. They argue that the Red Notice is based on manipulated evidence, omits crucial medical information, and was issued without proper justification. Furthermore, they have requested the revocation of the Red Notice through the National Central Bureau and INTERPOL’s Commission for the Control of Files (CCF).
The family also challenges the validity of an arrest warrant issued for Ofori-Atta, dated February 11, 2025, claiming it lacks a necessary supporting affidavit and that no formal charges have been filed. They question the circumstances surrounding the issuance of the warrant and maintain that the accusation of using public office for private profit is unfounded. The OSP’s subsequent designation of Ofori-Atta as a fugitive from justice has further fueled the family’s outrage. They argue that this designation, allegedly first announced during a media briefing, lacks any legal basis and represents a further escalation of the OSP’s purported vendetta.
In response to the OSP’s actions, the Ofori-Atta family has sought legal recourse through the Human Rights Court. They contend that their fundamental rights have been violated and are seeking a ruling to overturn the OSP’s decisions. A ruling in this case is expected on June 18 and will likely significantly impact the ongoing legal battle. The family hopes the court will recognize the alleged procedural flaws and political motivations behind the OSP’s actions.
Despite the Ofori-Atta family’s claims, Sukparu maintains that the OSP is adhering to proper legal protocols. He reiterates that the OSP is acting on legitimate complaints and fulfilling its constitutional duty to investigate corruption allegations. This stance reinforces the government’s narrative that the OSP’s actions are justified and not politically motivated. The conflicting perspectives of the Ofori-Atta family and MP Sukparu highlight the deep divisions and high stakes in this unfolding legal drama. The outcome of the Human Rights Court case will be pivotal in determining the future course of the investigation and the credibility of both the OSP and the accusations against the former finance minister. The case has become a focal point in Ghana’s ongoing fight against corruption and raises crucial questions about due process, political influence, and the balance of power between government institutions.
