Ghana’s long and often uneven march toward curbing corruption has rarely followed a straight path. It has been characterised by institutional experimentation, recurring public agitation, partisan accusations, and periodic national recommitments to transparency. Still, each reform cycle has nudged the country closer to building stronger governance systems. It was within this broader trajectory that the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) was established—an institution intended to reflect Ghana’s determination to confront corruption through a specialised, independent, and professional mechanism outside the traditional prosecutorial structure.
The recent controversy following the arrest and detention of private legal practitioner Martin Kpebu has reignited calls for the repeal of the OSP Act, 2017 (Act 959). Critics argue that certain actions by Special Prosecutor Kissi Agyebeng, including alleged procedural excesses, show that the structure itself is faulty rather than the individuals leading it. Yet, as political tensions heighten—particularly within the enduring New Patriotic Party (NPP) and National Democratic Congress (NDC) rivalry—there is a genuine risk that Ghana could discard a crucial institution in response to temporary agitation.
This article argues that dismantling the OSP would reverse significant progress in Ghana’s anti-corruption architecture. If individuals within the office have erred, accountability mechanisms already exist. The institution, however, must remain.
A Brief Background to Ghana’s Anti-Corruption Evolution
From the era of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) to the later Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO), Ghana has consistently experimented with institutional models to combat corruption. EOCO broadened investigative capacity but remained closely tied to the executive, feeding public scepticism about political neutrality.
By 2016, the national mood had shifted decisively. There was broad agreement across political, civic, and professional circles, that Ghana needed a more independent body to investigate and prosecute corruption-related offences without fear or favour. This consensus led to the establishment of the OSP in 2018, under President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, with Martin Amidu as the first Special Prosecutor. For the first time, Ghana created a legally insulated anti-corruption prosecutor mandated specifically to investigate, prosecute, and recover proceeds of corruption.
Achievements and Progress Under the OSP
Although relatively young, the OSP has recorded several noteworthy gains. These include investigations into high-profile procurement irregularities, actions targeting suspected corruption in public bodies, strengthened asset recovery processes, and the introduction of compliance and risk assessment frameworks that compelled institutions to examine their internal vulnerabilities.
Significantly, Parliament itself has acknowledged measurable financial achievements by the OSP. According to the Report of the Constitutional and Legal Affairs Committee on the 2026 Budget Estimates of the office, adopted on December 3, 2025, the OSP secured GHS 6,506,198.89 and US$2,000,000.00 in recoveries and savings for the state through plea bargains and actions relating to the diversion of petroleum products. These were cited as concrete contributions to safeguarding public resources and improving fiscal outcomes.
Under Special Prosecutor Kissi Agyebeng, the OSP expanded its operational presence, strengthened public engagement, and stimulated national debate on political and bureaucratic accountability. While some actions generated controversy, they also demonstrated an institution working to assert independence and test the limits of its mandate.
Acknowledging Shortfalls and Excesses
The OSP has not escaped criticism. Concerns have been raised about delays in concluding investigations, slow prosecution timelines, procedural irregularities, and the perceived overreach of certain powers. The detention of Martin Kpebu intensified public and institutional scrutiny, with critics citing it as evidence of due-process challenges.
Civil society groups, legal analysts, and some Members of Parliament contend that these lapses may reflect structural inefficiencies. Others argue they are tied to leadership decisions rather than flaws in the institutional design itself. Regardless of interpretation, such concerns are not surprising for a young institution navigating complex legal and operational terrain.
Crucially, Ghana’s accountability mechanisms—judicial review, parliamentary oversight, internal disciplinary procedures, and the supervisory role of the Attorney-General—exist precisely to correct such missteps. Abolishing the institution would risk discarding a valuable enforcement mechanism rather than improving it.
Separating the Individual From the Institution
It is important to distinguish the OSP from the actions of its current leadership. Act 959 mandates the office to:
- investigate and prosecute corruption and corruption-related offences
- recover proceeds of corruption and prevent asset dissipation
- reduce the burden on EOCO and the Attorney-General
- enhance public confidence in anti-corruption enforcement
- provide a non-partisan accountability mechanism insulated from executive direction
These goals remain relevant and urgent. Ghana’s democratic development has depended on strengthening institutions even in moments of leadership turbulence. As a relatively new body, the OSP deserves the opportunity to mature.
The OSP’s Relevance in an Era of National Resetting
Ghana is currently undergoing what the President of the republic, John Dramani Mahama calls resetting. This is a deliberate realignment of national priorities, governance systems, and expectations of public accountability. Under the president’s renewed leadership vision, the emphasis is on rebuilding trust in state institutions, restoring fiscal discipline, and reinforcing ethical governance.
In this context, the OSP becomes more critical than ever.
A national reset requires institutions capable of checking excesses in real time, not retrospectively. The OSP by design, serves as an independent watchdog over both current and future public officeholders. Its continued existence strengthens the credibility of any administration seeking to demonstrate commitment to clean governance.
An effective, reformed OSP directly supports President Mahama’s aspirations by:
- acting as a neutral barrier against misuse of public resources
- ensuring that new policy directions are not undermined by entrenched corruption networks
- signalling to citizens and investors that accountability will be sustained
- reinforcing the discipline and transparency needed for national renewal
Eliminating the office at such a pivotal moment risks creating gaps in oversight precisely when Ghana is attempting to rebuild administrative integrity.
The Politics and the Bigger Picture
In Ghana’s polarised political context, investigations often trigger partisan reactions, complicating objective assessments. Yet the national fight against corruption cannot be reduced to NPP–NDC contestation. The durability of key institutions is essential for national development.
Scrapping the OSP would weaken anti-corruption enforcement and signal that political discomfort or leadership controversy is grounds enough to eliminate a core accountability mechanism, an outcome that would undermine the country’s governance reset.
A More Constructive Path Forward
Rather than repealing Act 959 by the introduction of a Private Members Bill as being proposed, Parliament could strengthen the OSP through reforms such as:
- clearer procedural safeguards for arrests and interrogations
- enhanced parliamentary oversight
- stronger cooperation with EOCO, CHRAJ, and the Ghana Police Service
- sustained funding tied to performance indicators
- improved internal checks on prosecutorial discretion
These reforms would maintain independence while ensuring accountability.
Reform, Don’t Scrap
The debate sparked by the Kpebu incident has exposed operational weaknesses, but it has also highlighted why an independent anti-corruption prosecutor is indispensable. Ghana needs stronger, not weaker, institutions to confront corruption, especially in a period of national resetting.
If missteps have occurred, they must be addressed through legal and administrative reforms, not by dismantling the institution.
In a governance environment where corruption continues to evolve, Ghana cannot afford to step backward. The path forward remains clear: reform the Office of the Special Prosecutor, do not repeal it.
By: Christian Kpesese, the writer is the editor@www.naturalresourcesnews.com
