The Member of Parliament for Gushegu and Ranking Member on Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee, Hassan Tampuli, has alleged that recent legal and political actions targeting the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) form part of a coordinated effort to weaken the institution after it pursued high-profile prosecutions.
Speaking on behalf of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) Minority at a press conference, Mr Tampuli said the sequence of petitions, parliamentary moves and court actions against the OSP were not isolated events, but “political weapons” aimed at dismantling an institution performing its mandate.
“The petitions were not serious legal instruments. They were political weapons designed to harass, delegitimise, and remove from office a public servant whose crime was that he was doing his job,” he said.
His comments follow the recent ruling of the Accra High Court on April 15, 2026, which declared all OSP prosecutions null and void on constitutional grounds — a decision that has already triggered renewed national debate over the future of the anti-corruption body.
Mr Tampuli told journalists that petitions submitted to President John Mahama seeking the removal of the Special Prosecutor were “coordinated and strategically timed” to create the impression of public dissatisfaction.
He added that the petitions were reviewed after being referred to the Chief Justice, with no prima facie case reportedly established against the Special Prosecutor.
“Three referred formally to the Chief Justice. Zero prima facie case established,” he stated.
According to him, after the petition process failed, attempts were made in Parliament to curtail the powers of the OSP — efforts he said also collapsed publicly.
He further referenced a Supreme Court suit filed by a private legal practitioner challenging the constitutionality of the OSP’s prosecutorial powers, describing it as the “third phase” of a sustained strategy to weaken the institution through different legal channels.
“When you cannot kill an institution by statute, you attempt to do so through constitutional litigation,” he argued.
The Minority insists the timing of these developments is not coincidental, pointing to overlaps between the court ruling, parliamentary actions and the filing of the Supreme Court case.
The Supreme Court case remains pending.
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