The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) has defended its decision to publicly clarify issues surrounding its investigations, insisting that such statements should not be interpreted as evidence of a breakdown in its relationship with the Attorney-General’s Office.
The OSP said differences that may emerge between the two institutions in the course of carrying out their statutory responsibilities should not be mistaken for an institutional conflict.
Director of Strategy, Research and Communications at the OSP, Samuel Appiah Darko, said the office continues to collaborate with the Attorney-General and other relevant state institutions in the fight against corruption.
He made the remarks when he called into JoyNews’ Newsfile on Saturday, August 29, following discussions on the programme about the apparent relationship between the OSP and the Attorney-General’s Office.
Mr Appiah Darko acknowledged that recent developments may have created an impression of tension between the two institutions but maintained that the OSP must be able to respond when information concerning its work is placed in the public domain.
“The issue that the OSP is not collaborating with the AG, I think that it is a wrong perception,” he said.
Responding to a question about whether the OSP’s frequent public explanations suggested tension, he said clarifying information that the office considers inaccurate should not automatically be interpreted as an attempt to create conflict.
“I know that people think that there is tension between the AG and the OSP. There could be tension, but you cannot also deny the OSP from also telling Ghanaians about some of the things that it is doing, and it wants to do,” he stated.
According to him, the OSP has a responsibility to provide accurate information about its activities, particularly when public discussions contain information that the office considers misleading.
He stressed that responding to such claims does not amount to engaging in a dispute with the Attorney-General or any other institution.
The comments come amid heightened public interest in the working relationship between the two institutions, particularly following disagreements over aspects of major corruption-related investigations.
Recent public exchanges concerning the AKSA bribery allegations and the Abu Trica case have contributed to perceptions that the OSP and Attorney-General’s Office are operating at odds with each other.
The disagreements have also triggered public discussion over the respective mandates of the two institutions and the roles they play in investigating and prosecuting corruption-related offences.
Mr Appiah Darko, however, maintained that the OSP remains committed to institutional cooperation and continues to engage relevant stakeholders in the discharge of its mandate.
He said the existence of differences on particular matters should not be interpreted as a collapse of cooperation between state institutions.
The OSP’s position effectively shifts the focus from perceived institutional rivalry to the need for clarity on the distinct statutory responsibilities of the various bodies involved in Ghana’s anti-corruption architecture.
Mr Appiah Darko assured the public that the OSP would continue to communicate its work where necessary while maintaining the cooperation required to pursue corruption-related cases effectively.
He said public clarification by the OSP should therefore be viewed as part of its responsibility to account to Ghanaians rather than as evidence of an institutional feud with the Attorney-General.
