Special Prosecutor Kissi Agyebeng has described the final six months of 2025 as a period of “extreme resistance”, criticising an “unfair” coordinated existential threat designed to terminate its independence.
In the OSP Half-Yearly Report covering July to December 2025, the Special Prosecutor detailed a turbulent chapter characterised by a high-stakes legislative attempt to subsume the Office under the Attorney-General’s Department.
The report paints a picture of an anti-corruption agency under siege by “those justly threatened by accountability”.
According to Mr Agyebeng, the most significant threat materialised in the form of a Private Member’s Bill introduced in Parliament aimed at abolishing the OSP.
Proponents of the bill argued that the Office was a “drain on national resources” and cited institutional friction and jurisdictional overlaps with the Attorney-General.
However, the bill was swiftly withdrawn following a direct intervention by President John Dramani Mahama.
The Special Prosecutor moved to commend the President for his decisive action, noting that the move preserved the gold standard of independent anti-corruption efforts.
“The President’s action stamped firmly the well-considered collective wisdom… that the Attorney General, being a member of Cabinet and chief legal advisor to the Government, is not well-suited to investigate and prosecute members of a government to which he belongs,” the report stated.
Refuting the “Drain on Resources” Narrative
The Special Prosecutor launched a vigorous defense against claims that the Office has failed to deliver impact relative to its operational costs. The report dismissed the memorandum accompanying the withdrawn bill as a collection of “bare statements” made without any empirical examination of the OSP’s actual performance.
The sponsors of the bill had claimed that consolidating power under the Attorney-General would enhance coordination and efficiency. The OSP, however, countered that these arguments lacked any demonstration of how a Cabinet member could more effectively fight corruption within their own administration.
“A careful examination of the stated reasons for the calls to abolish the Office clearly posits that the reasons are most unfair and that they were advanced without any reference to the actual performance of the Office and its demonstrated impact since its inception,” the Special Prosecutor maintained.
While the report acknowledged the nature of the challenges faced in late 2025, it emphasised that the OSP does not shy away from accountability.
The Office pointed to its “assiduous attendance” before Parliamentary oversight committees as proof of its transparency.
The Special Prosecutor concluded that the pushback experienced in the second half of the year was a direct consequence of the Office’s effectiveness in threatening the status quo of impunity.
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
