The Member of Parliament for South Dayi and Majority Chief Whip, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, has insisted that the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) is legally required to obtain authorisation from the Attorney General before initiating any prosecution — and that failure to do so renders such prosecutions invalid.
Speaking in an exclusive interview with Joy News, Dafeamekpor cited both the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act and its accompanying Legislative Instrument, LI 2374, to back his position.
“The law is the law. And the true intent of Parliament is what has been captured in the law. And that is what ought to have been followed,” he said.
The Majority Chief Whip was unequivocal: where a law prescribes a specific procedure for exercising a right, only that procedure is lawful.
The OSP’s mandate, he stressed, is narrow and deliberate — limited to corruption and corruption-related offences — and the requirement for specific authorisation from the Attorney General’s office is not an administrative formality but a legal precondition.
Dafeamekpor also pushed back against any suggestion that criticism of the OSP’s prosecutorial conduct is tantamount to opposition to the institution itself. He was at pains to separate the two, affirming that no one within the NDC is against the existence of the OSP.
“Let me dispel this notion that anybody or anyone connected with the NDC is against the establishment of the Office of the Special Prosecutor at all,” he said.
He revealed that he had raised concerns about the OSP overstepping its mandate as far back as last year, shortly after the detention and subsequent release of businessman Martin Pebu became a national controversy.
At the time, Dafeamekpor warned publicly that the OSP appeared to be widening its reach beyond its defined scope and cautioned that someone would eventually raise a legal objection, which has now happened.
To ground his argument in parliamentary history, the legislator referenced the Hansard from the floor debate of 1st November 2017, during which the OSP Act was being crafted.
He quoted the then-Chairman of the relevant committee, who reminded MPs that the bill originated not from Parliament’s own initiative but at the direct behest of the Attorney General — who, conscious of the weight of Article 88 of the Constitution, sought to delegate prosecutorial responsibility to a dedicated officer.
The committee chairman had told Parliament then that the Constitution itself can establish an office or confer a right without further legislation, but where Parliament creates an office through statute, the operational parameters of that office are bound by what Parliament enacted.
That distinction, Dafeamekpor argues, is precisely what the courts have now vindicated — following the Accra High Court’s ruling on April 15, 2026, which declared all OSP prosecutions carried out without the requisite Attorney General authorisation null and void.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.
Source: www.myjoyonline.com