The Supreme Court has turned down a request to include the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) as a party in a constitutional lawsuit questioning the scope of the Office’s legal authority.

The suit was filed by private legal practitioner Noah Adamptey, who is challenging the constitutional basis of Parliament’s decision to establish the OSP under the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959).

At proceedings held on Tuesday, January 27, counsel for the OSP, led by Dr Isidore Tufuor, argued that the case directly affects the mandate of the Office. According to him, the reliefs being sought raise constitutional issues tied specifically to Sections 4 and 33 of Act 959.

He told the court that while the action appears to be directed at the state, it does not seek to abolish the OSP but rather questions the legality of certain powers granted to it. On that basis, Dr Tufuor submitted that the OSP ought to be joined as a party to enable the court to fully resolve the matter.

The application was, however, strongly opposed by Deputy Attorney-General Dr Justice Srem-Sai, who maintained that the OSP has no legal interest in the case that justifies its inclusion.

“It is the maker of the law who must defend it,” he argued, emphasizing that the OSP was created by Parliament and that any constitutional challenge to its enabling law falls within the responsibility of the Attorney-General.

Dr Srem-Sai further contended that the OSP does not possess any personal or proprietary stake in its own establishment and, therefore, cannot be regarded as a necessary party in the action.

Backing this position, Noah Adamptey argued that the role of the OSP had been wrongly interpreted by those seeking its joinder. He stated that the Office would neither benefit nor suffer prejudice from the outcome of the case and should not be drawn into a dispute over legislative authority.

After considering submissions from all sides, a Supreme Court panel chaired by Justice Baffoe-Bonnie ruled that the OSP’s participation was not required.

The court said it had examined the application and accompanying documents and concluded that the Office of the Special Prosecutor is not essential to the determination of the suit.

As a result, the application for joinder was dismissed, clearing the way for the constitutional case to continue without the OSP as a party.