Ghana’s fight against corruption increasingly appears to wear two faces. On the surface, the State presents itself as battle-ready, with sharpened institutions, active prosecutions, and the language of accountability spoken with urgency. Yet beneath that outward resolve lies a quieter hesitation; an uncertainty about its own footing, where the very tools forged to fight corruption are now being questioned in the midst of the battle.
It is a contrast almost like a system stepping onto the battlefield dressed for war, yet still adjusting its gear; moving forward with visible energy, but occasionally glancing back to ask whether the ground beneath is truly secure.
Tamale trial edges toward judgment after three-year prosecution
The criminal trial involving former senior officials of the Northern Development Authority and the Chief Executive of A&QS Consortium Limited is approaching its final stages at the Criminal Division of the High Court in Tamale.
The accused persons include the former Chief Executive of the Authority, the former Deputy Chief Executive in charge of Operations, and the former Deputy Chief Executive in charge of Finance and Administration, alongside the Chief Executive of A&QS Consortium Limited.
They face eleven counts of corruption and corruption-related offences, including conspiracy to influence a procurement process for unfair advantage, influencing a procurement process to obtain advantage, corruption by a public officer, and corruption of a public officer.
On April 26, 2024, the High Court dismissed a submission of no case to answer, ruling that the prosecution had established a prima facie case on all counts and ordering the accused persons to open their defence. The defence began in October 2024 and has since continued, with reports indicating that attempts to overturn the ruling at the Court of Appeal were unsuccessful.
With proceedings set to continue today, the case appears to be moving steadily toward judgment. But as it does so, one question quietly emerges, what happens when a long-running trial reaches its end under a legal cloud that was not there at its beginning?
OSP’s prosecutorial powers under renewed legal scrutiny
The proceedings are unfolding against a broader legal controversy surrounding the prosecutorial authority of the Office of the Special Prosecutor. A challenge is currently pending before the Supreme Court of Ghana, where the legality of the OSP’s power to prosecute is being questioned by a private citizen.
That case has already begun to reverberate through ongoing criminal trials across the country, with defence teams increasingly testing the boundaries of the OSP’s mandate.
Is the prosecuting authority itself standing on firm legal ground—or is it being tested mid-battle?
High Court decisions split on OSP mandate
Recent rulings at the High Court have reflected a growing judicial divergence. In one instance, the General Jurisdiction Division of the High Court in Accra effectively held that the OSP lacks prosecutorial powers and struck out proceedings in the rice scandal case, concluding that the institution was not competent to continue the prosecution.
However, in the criminal division originally handling the matter, the court adopted a more restrained approach. It stayed the matter, pending the Supreme Court’s decision in the matterThe contrasting positions have deepened uncertainty around ongoing prosecutions initiated by the OSP.
When a prosecuting authority is questioned in one courtroom but permitted to proceed in another, what then becomes the meaning of legal certainty?
Defence strategies shifting in OSP cases
Following these developments, it is increasingly anticipated that accused persons in OSP-prosecuted cases may raise similar objections, challenging not only the allegations but the authority behind the prosecutions themselves. That trend is already visible.
In Republic v. Mustapha Hamid & Others, involving a former Chief Executive of the National Petroleum Authority, the High Court recently refused an application to discharge the accused persons on the basis that the OSP lacks prosecutorial authority. The court acknowledged the ongoing legal proceedings surrounding the issue and adjourned the case to May 26, indicating that greater clarity may emerge by then.
The OSP maintains that its prosecutorial mandate remains valid under its enabling statute, which is still in force and has not been invalidated by any binding decision of the apex court.
So the battle line remains unchanged. but is the legal ground beneath it shifting?
Tamale trial enters uncertain final stretch
Against this backdrop, the Tamale trial continues, now operating under a legal cloud that extends beyond the facts of the case itself.
As proceedings resume today, attention will not only focus on the continuation of witness testimony, but also on whether the defence will introduce arguments anchored on the emerging challenge to the OSP’s authority, and how the court will respond if such issues arise at this late stage.
For a trial that has spanned more than three years and is now nearing judgment, the uncertainty is no longer distant. It is present in the courtroom.
And as the case moves forward, one question quietly follows every procedural step: whether the law governing the prosecution will remain as it is being applied today, or be redefined while the trial is still in motion.
