ORAL: Expectations v. Criminal justice system
The National Democratic Congress’s (NDC) campaign promise of ‘Operation Recover All Loot’ (ORAL) has captured the attention of many Ghanaians, especially the youth.
This initiative aims to uncover corruption by former state officials and prosecute them to recover public funds.
Speculation about the unit’s effectiveness is rife. However, many overlook the complexities of the criminal justice system regarding corruption cases. I examine Ghanaians’ expectations of the unit in light of these legal procedures.
Expectations
Since the early days of the Fourth Republic, Ghanaians have expressed strong disapproval of corruption and a desire to prosecute corrupt officials.
Under Jerry John Rawlings, corrupt individuals faced significant consequences, establishing a standard that Ghanaians expect from subsequent governments.
The public believes that corrupt officials should be prosecuted, convicted and have their assets seized to compensate for the misuse of public funds.
While this approach is evident in countries such as China, Japan and Russia, Ghana’s criminal justice system has specific laws and procedures for investigating and prosecuting corruption.
Criminal Justice system
Section 179A of the Criminal and Other Offences Act 1960 (Act 29) addresses special offences related to causing loss, damage or injury to property of public bodies.
It states that a person commits a criminal offence if they intentionally cause loss or damage to the property of a public body or agency of the Republic.
Additionally, it covers those whose wilful or malicious actions lead to financial loss for the Republic or endanger its security. The term “public body” includes the Republic, government and other entities with public interest.
This section criminalises corrupt practices resulting in financial loss to the state as reaffirmed in the case of The Republic v. Ibrahim Adam & Others, where former officials were implicated in causing significant financial loss to the state due to their involvement with a private company’s loan defaults.
The court ruled that any wilful or reckless act resulting in loss to the state constituted an offence.
Certain institutions are tasked with investigating and prosecuting corrupt officials. Article 88(3) of the 1992 Constitution assigns the Attorney General the duty to initiate and conduct all criminal prosecutions.
The responsibility to investigate complaints of corrupt practices among public officials extends to institutions such as the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) as outlined in Articles 218(e) and 219.
This was upheld in Republic v. High Court (Fast Track Division); Ex-parte: CHRAJ (Dr Richard Anane, Interested Party), where Justice Date-Baah supported CHRAJ’s view that it could act without a formal complaint. He noted that the term ‘complaint’ was ambiguous and limiting CHRAJ’s powers would undermine its purpose.
The Commissions of Inquiry, established by the President or the Council of State for the public interest (Article 278[1]), investigate corrupt practices as outlined in Article 280.
This was highlighted in the case of Republic v. Charles Wereko Brobbey and Kwadwo Mpiani, where members of the Ghana@50 Secretariat were prosecuted for causing financial loss to the state based on the commission’s findings.
Lastly, the Special Prosecutor, established under the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act of 2017 (Act 959), is also mandated to investigate specific cases of alleged or suspected corruption and corruption-related offences.
This includes cases involving public officials, politically exposed individuals and private sector participants who may be involved in these offences.
Conclusion
While we all desire to see corrupt officials prosecuted, it is important to note that Parliament must pass legislation to establish the scope of the anti-corruption preparation unit.
This legislation should clearly define the unit’s functions and mandates, ensuring that it operates within the framework of existing laws in the criminal justice system.
The writer is a 3rd Year LLB candidate, UPSA Law School.
E-mail: ellakwatia233@gmail.com