OSP, A-G clash over Ofori-Atta’s extradition

A simmering institutional tension between two leading anti-graft bodies— the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and the Attorney-General’s Department (AG) — has burst into the open following the leak of confidential correspondences over the planned extradition of former Finance Minister, Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori-Atta.

The exchanges, spanning from June to October 2025, reveal deep-seated disagreements over legal procedures, jurisdiction, and independence of the OSP, raising fresh concerns about coordination within the country’s justice architecture.

The controversy traces its roots to a letter dated June 2, 2025, in which the Special Prosecutor, Kissi Agyebeng, wrote to the Chief of Staff at the Office of the President, Julius Debrah seeking executive assistance to trigger extradition proceedings against Ken Ofori-Atta, who had reportedly left Ghana for the United States shortly after leaving office.

The OSP’s request sought the Presidency’s help in activating “international cooperation mechanisms” to secure the “provisional apprehension and extradition” of the former minister, who faces multiple allegations of corruption, procurement irregularities, and financial misconduct during his tenure between 2017 and 2024.

However, in a reply dated June 6, 2025, the Chief of Staff redirected the OSP’s request to the Attorney-General’s Department, explaining that the Presidency lacked constitutional authority to initiate extradition procedures.

The response cited Article 88 of the 1992 Constitution, which vests such responsibilities in the Attorney-General as the government’s principal legal advisor and representative in international legal matters.

Following the referral, the Attorney-General, Dr. Dominic Ayine, through his deputy, Justice Srem-Sai, wrote back to the OSP on June 13, 2025, proposing inter-agency collaboration to advance the extradition process.

The AG’s office requested that the OSP submit the full case docket, including an investigative report and supporting evidence, to facilitate the drafting of formal extradition documents to the U.S. Department of Justice.

The AG’s letter also suggested that the OSP nominate two investigators to join a joint task force with officers from the Ministry of Justice and the Ghana Police Service — a move meant to align domestic and international legal standards.

While the OSP complied partially by nominating Director Albert Akurugu, Director Asset Recovery and Management Division and Kaiser Francis Amedome Wilson, Senior Prosecutor as its representatives in a June 20, 2025 response, it refused to release the case docket, arguing that investigations were ongoing.

According to OSP insiders, sharing incomplete documentation could compromise the integrity of the case, breach security protocols, and expose sensitive evidence.

This stance reportedly frustrated the AG’s Department, which viewed it as obstructionist and inconsistent with established extradition procedures requiring sufficient documentary proof before an international request can be filed.

The tension escalated when the AG’s Department sent a reminder letter on September 3, 2025, again signed by Deputy AG Srem-Sai, urging the OSP to submit at least an interim report to enable the process to proceed.

The AG’s office emphasized that provisional extradition could be pursued while investigations continued, provided the initial request met the threshold of prima facie evidence.

Despite this appeal, by October 2025, the OSP had yet to release the requested files, deepening suspicions of a bureaucratic standoff between the two state institutions.

Public Statement

Faced with growing public speculation and media scrutiny, the Office of the Special Prosecutor issued a public statement on October 10, 2025, breaking its silence.

In a strongly worded release, the OSP reaffirmed its institutional independence, insisting that it neither reports to nor takes directives from the Attorney-General.

The statement read in part: “The Office of the Special Prosecutor does not report to the Attorney-General, does not send dockets to the Attorney-General for prosecution, and does not operate under the supervision of the Attorney-General’s Department.

The OSP is an independent agency, established by law, to ensure that corruption and corruption-related offences are investigated and prosecuted without political or executive interference.”

The OSP emphasized that its correspondence with the Chief of Staff was confidential and should never have been leaked, warning that only select staff have access to sensitive documents due to the agency’s security classification.

It further justified withholding the docket, explaining that premature release of incomplete evidence could undermine the credibility before international legal partners and jeopardize ongoing investigative efforts.

The office also revealed that it had taken alternative steps, including initiating a Red Notice through Interpol and engaging directly with international law enforcement to track Mr. Ofori-Atta’s whereabouts.

“The reality is that the OSP remains the only institution that has formally placed Mr. Ofori-Atta on a Red Notice and is cooperating with international partners to secure his return. Extraditing someone from the United States is not inherently difficult; the real challenge lies in demonstrating that the process is free from political interference and that the accused will receive a fair trial. That requirement has stalled other high-profile cases, such as Sedinam Tamakloe’s, despite convictions in Ghana.

“Mr. Ofori-Atta appears to be exploiting this same line of defence in the U.S., portraying the case as politically motivated. Any leaks or statements that create an impression of internal disunity or political influence only strengthen that argument and undermine Ghana’s position before foreign authorities”, OSP said.

In what appears to be a subtle rebuke, the OSP questioned the basis of the Attorney-General’s demand for its docket, reiterating that the Special Prosecutor is constitutionally empowered to investigate and prosecute corruption-related cases independently of the AG’s oversight.