A quiet legal challenge in Ghana’s Supreme Court has suddenly become a battle for the future of the country’s anti-corruption efforts. In the case of Adamtey v. Attorney-General, the state’s own chief legal officer is arguing that the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) was created unconstitutionally. This unexpected turn puts one of Ghana’s most critical watchdogs in a precarious position.
The OSP was established in 2017 to solve a long-standing structural flaw in how Ghana fights graft. Because the Attorney-General is a presidential appointee, there’s often a perceived conflict of interest when the political elite are under investigation. The OSP was designed to be an independent shield, insulating corruption cases from political influence.
At the heart of the dispute is Article 88(3) of the 1992 Constitution, which states the Attorney-General is responsible for “all” criminal prosecutions. The Attorney-General argues that Parliament overstepped its bounds by passing the OSP Act, claiming constitutional power cannot be handed to an independent body without a formal amendment. Adding to the tension, the Supreme Court recently blocked the OSP from joining the lawsuit to defend its own mandate.
The fallout from this ruling could be severe, potentially stripping the OSP of its operational freedom. If the court agrees with the Attorney-General, every single prosecution would require written authorization from the AG’s office. Professor H. Kwasi Prempeh of CDD-Ghana warned that excluding the OSP from the case “risks prioritising procedural form over substantive justice.”
This case isn’t just about one office; it’s about the limits of Parliament’s power to create accountability institutions. The court’s decision will define whether independent watchdogs can exist within Ghana’s current constitutional framework. It’s a defining moment for the balance of power between the executive and the legislative branches.
