The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) has the constitutional authority to prosecute criminal cases, provided it acts with the authorisation of the Attorney-General.
The seven-member panel, presided over by Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie, held that the Attorney-General retained the exclusive constitutional mandate to undertake criminal prosecutions under Article 88 of the 1992 Constitution.
“No person may exercise the prosecutorial function independently of the Attorney-General or in parallel with him,” the Court ruled.
The Court further held that the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act was consistent with the Constitution and was therefore not unconstitutional.
It ruled that the OSP could prosecute criminal cases under the authority contemplated by Article 88 of the Constitution.
The Court also held that the Attorney-General retained the power to enter a nolle prosequi in criminal cases initiated by the OSP.
It further ruled that all prosecutions instituted, arrests effected, and seizures and confiscations carried out by the OSP since its establishment remained valid.
The decision overturns a High Court ruling delivered in April 2026, which held that the OSP lacked the constitutional authority to prosecute criminal cases independently.
The High Court had ordered that criminal matters initiated by the OSP be referred to the Attorney-General and ruled that the OSP’s attempt to prosecute corruption-related offences independently was unconstitutional.
The High Court ruled that the OSP had not demonstrated that it had authorisation from the AG to prosecute cases.
Therefore, all cases being prosecuted at the various courts by the OSP be taken over by the AG.
The court also declared that convictions secured by the OSP are void.
The Supreme Court, however, held that all orders or rulings made by any other courts below it were void and same be set aside.
