The former Special Prosecutor and former Attorney General in the Mills’ administration, Martin Amidu, has taken a swipe at his successor, Kissi Adjabeng for doing a poor job on the alleged acts of corruption involving the Labianca Group of Companies and the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority
In his latest epistle issued last Friday, the Citizen Vigilante said the Special Prosecutor exceeded his powers in many aspects as far as investigations into the Labianca matter are concerned
According to him, the “Report of Investigations into Alleged Commission of Corruption And CorruptionRelated Offences involving Labianca Group of Companies and the Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority” does not contain or disclose the authority or mandate of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959) under which the report was written, and directives given for payment of “….an amount of One Million Seventy-Four Thousand Cedis (sic) Six Hundred and Twenty-Seven Cedis (sic) Fifteen Pesewas (GHC 1,074,627.15) representing the short collection or shortfall of revenue arising from the issuance of the unlawful customs advance.
Martin Amidu maintains the report is, therefore, inconsistent with and contravenes Act 959 and the 1992 Constitution adding that It constitutes an impermissible persecution of mere witnesses in the court of public opinion by the OSP instead of in a court of law.
“McCarthyism is not permitted under the 1992 Constitution,” he said.
He said a critical reading of the report discloses that “it was purportedly made in pursuance of the exercise of the investigatory functions of the OSP into corruption and corruption-related offences in accordance with the functions of the Office contained in section 3 of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act (959) and Regulations 5, 6, and 7 of the Office of the Special Prosecutor (Operations) Regulations, 2018 (L. I. 2374) dealing with preliminary inquiry, investigation, full investigation, and investigation panels. These are the only provisions of the law governing the mandate of the Office referred to in the OSP report on the Labianca case as grounding the report”
According to Martin Amidu, the OSP Labianca report and its unlawful and unconstitutional publication for the trial of persons who had been told they were only witnesses and not suspects in the investigation in the court of public opinion fails to meet the basic mandate of the Office under Act 959, and the 1992 Constitution adding that it violates all prosecutorial ethics and conduct.
He cautioned that “the OSP like Caesar’s wife must live above suspicion that is why this critique and analysis of the Labianca investigation report published by the Special Prosecutor which is contended to be contrary to the mandate of the OSP under Act 959 and the 1992 Constitution has been made”.
“The Constitution must be defended when such an august Office unlawfully tramples on the rights of citizens by lynching them in the court of public opinion despite the presumption of innocence and without a trial in a court of law. The participation of Corruption Watch Ghana and other civil society actors in the trial of the witnesses in the court of public opinion shows the dangers posed by McCarthyism in the name of fighting corruption. An application for certiorari in the High Court will certainly quash the unlawful and unconstitutional adverse findings contained in the Labianca report,” Martin Amidu concluded
