The Supreme Court has delivered its final judgment in the case challenging the prosecutorial powers of the Office of the Special Prosecutor, OSP, filed by private legal practitioner Noah Adamtey.
The suit, which was supported by the Attorney-General, sought eight reliefs aimed at declaring the OSP’s prosecutorial powers unconstitutional and striking down the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017, Act 959.
But in a decisive ruling, the apex court granted only one of the substantive reliefs and dismissed six others, while using its consequential powers to save all OSP prosecutions.
THE RELIEFS SOUGHT AND THE OUTCOME
According to the certified judgment sighted by this portal, this is what the plaintiffs asked for and what the Supreme Court decided:
Relief (a) – GRANTED
Declaration that prosecutorial authority in Ghana is vested in the Attorney-General and cannot be exercised independently of, or in parallel with, the Attorney-General.
Relief (b) – DISMISSED
Declaration that Act 959 is unconstitutional to the extent it confers original, autonomous, or insulated prosecutorial authority on the OSP.
Relief (c) – DISMISSED
Declaration that sections 3(3) and 4 of Act 959 are unconstitutional because they make the OSP independent of the Attorney-General in prosecutions.
Relief (d) – DISMISSED
Declaration that Parliament lacked authority to create a prosecutorial body independent of the Attorney-General without a constitutional amendment.
Relief (e) – DISMISSED
Declaration that Parliament acted ultra vires in enacting Act 959.
Relief (f) – DISMISSED
Declaration that any delegation of prosecutorial authority under Act 959 lapses whenever a new Attorney-General assumes office unless re-authorised.
Relief (g) – DISMISSED
Order striking down or severing the provisions of Act 959 that confer autonomous prosecutorial authority on the OSP or insulate it from the Attorney-General.
Relief (h) – GRANTED (Consequential Orders)
Any further orders or directions the Court considers just, equitable and necessary. The Supreme Court exercised this to:
– Set aside the High Court’s decision in the Archibald Hyde case as void; and
– Preserve and validate all investigations, prosecutions, and other actions lawfully undertaken by the OSP before the High Court’s decision.
PRACTICAL EFFECT OF THE JUDGMENT
The Supreme Court in its reasoning gave clarity to eight key issues that had created confusion in the legal system for months:
1. The Court affirmed that the Attorney-General remains the constitutional repository of the State’s overarching prosecutorial authority under Article 88 of the Constitution.
2. The Court confirmed that the OSP already possesses lawful authority to investigate and prosecute corruption and corruption-related offences under Act 959 and its Legislative Instrument, and does not require a fresh fiat from the Attorney-General before initiating prosecutions.
3. The Court rejected every substantive challenge seeking to declare the OSP’s prosecutorial powers unconstitutional or to strike down the relevant provisions of Act 959.
4. The Court rejected the argument that every new Attorney-General must re-authorise the OSP before it can prosecute cases.
5. The Court confirmed that the Special Prosecutor may exercise the statutory power to discontinue prosecutions initiated by the OSP (nolle prosequi), while recognising that the Attorney-General retains the constitutional nolle prosequi power under Article 88.
6. The Court set aside the High Court’s decision in the Archibald Hyde case as void. It will be recalled that Justice John Eugene Nyadu Nyante had on April 15, 2026 held that the OSP had no prosecutorial mandate.
7. The Court preserved and validated all investigations, prosecutions, and other actions lawfully undertaken by the OSP before the High Court’s decision.
8. The Court has cleared the way for the OSP to resume and continue its pending prosecutions that were put on hold.
In short, while the Supreme Court reaffirmed the Attorney-General’s overarching constitutional prosecutorial authority, it also upheld the constitutional validity of the OSP’s prosecutorial regime and the OSP’s operational independence.
The Court rejected every substantive relief that sought to dismantle or curtail the OSP’s mandate, leaving the Office’s investigative and prosecutorial powers fully intact.
Alexander Afriyie, supervising editor, ghanacrimereport.com and ghanatalk.com