The Supreme Court has ruled against an application by the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) to be joined as a party in a high-profile constitutional suit challenging the legality of powers granted to the anti-corruption body under the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959).
In a decision that could shape the future of the OSP, the apex court determined that the office was not a necessary party to the suit brought by private citizen and lawyer Noah Adamtey against the Attorney-General. As a result, the court refused the OSP’s application for joinder.
During proceedings, Dr. Isidore Tufuor, counsel for the OSP, argued passionately that the outcome of the case would directly impact the office’s core mandate, especially Sections 4 and 33 of Act 959, which set out the OSP’s prosecutorial powers. He insisted that, though the suit was directed at the State, it fundamentally questioned the very constitutionality of the OSP’s authority.
However, Deputy Attorney-General Dr. Justice Srem-Sai opposed the application, asserting that the OSP holds no independent interest in the matter. He contended that Parliament, the body that created the OSP, should answer for the constitutionality of the law. Noah Adamtey, the plaintiff, also resisted the OSP’s inclusion, maintaining that the office’s role had been misunderstood and that it lacked any personal or proprietary interest warranting its participation in the case.
After listening to arguments from all parties, the Supreme Court concluded that the key constitutional questions could be resolved without the involvement of the OSP. The justices held that the office was not essential for the fair and effective determination of the suit, and thus dismissed the application for joinder.
The ruling clears the way for the substantive case to proceed, with the spotlight now on Parliament and the Attorney-General to defend the legal foundation of the OSP.
Source: Apexnewsgh.com
