‘OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROSECUTOR ACT’ UNLAWFUL! …Suit Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ has been filed in the Supreme Court of Ghana seeking a declaration that the Office of Special Prosecutor Act, Act 957, is unconstitutional and therefore ought to be scrapped.

The suit is at the instance of Mr. Kenneth Agyei Kuranchie, an Accra private legal practitioner. He is also the Editor and Publisher of the Daily Searchlight.

The Writ cites as Defendants the Attorney-General, and the Office of Special Prosecutor. The Writ was filed together with its Statement of Case and Affidavit in verification, which means that the process is fully filed and ready for service on the defendants.

Mr. Kuranchie is seeking sixteen reliefs in the Supreme Court, which are as follows;

PLAINTIFF SUES PER THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS

1. A declaration that the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (ACT 957) is contrary to Articles 11, 17. (1),(2) and (3), 88. (3) and (4), 289.(2), 290. (1) (f)) and 290. (2) to (4), 12. (2) and 107 (b) of the 1992 Constitution;
2. A declaration that by the combined effects of Articles 290. (1)(f) and 290. (2) to (6), 93. (2), 107.(b) of the 1992 Constitution, Section 2 of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (ACT 957) has amended Article 88 of the 1992 Constitution and therefore contrary to Articles 11. (1)(b) of the 1992 Constitution;
3. A declaration that Section 4. (1) of Act 959 is contrary to Article 58. (1) and (2) of the 1992 Constitution.
4. A declaration that Section 25. (3) of Act 959 is contrary to Article 187. (5) and (6) of the 1992 Constitution.
5. A declaration that the true effect of Section 25. (3) of Act 959 is to amend Article 187. (5) and (6) of the 1992 Constitution and therefore contrary to Article 289, 290. (1)(j) and 290. (2) to (6).
6. A declaration that Section 26 of Act 959 is contrary to Article 187. (5) and (6) of the 1992 Constitution.
7. A declaration that the true effect of Section 26 of Act 959 is to amend Article 187. (5) and (6) of the 1992 Constitution and therefore contrary to Articles 289. (2), 290. (1) (j) and 290. (2), (3), (4), (5), and (6).
8. A declaration that Section 28 of Act 959 is contrary to Article 200. (2) and (3) of the 1992 Constitution.
9. A declaration that the true effect of Section 28 of Act 959 is to amend Article 200 of the 1992 Constitution and therefore contrary to Articles 289. (2), 290. (1) (k) and 290. (2), (3), (4), (5), and (6).
10. A declaration that Sections 29. (1), (2), (3), and (6), 30. (1) and 31 of Act 959 are contrary to Articles 15. (2),  (2)(c) and (10)  of the 1992 Constitution.
11. A declaration that Section 32 of Act 959 is contrary to Articles 18, 19. (2)(c) and (d), 15. (2) and 19. (10) and Article 125. (3) of the 1992 Constitution.
12. A declaration that Sections 32 to 37 of Act 959 are contrary to Articles 19. (11), 15. (1) to (3) and Article 125. (3) of the 1992 Constitution.
13. A declaration that Sections 38 to 43 of Act 959 are contrary to Articles 18. (1), (2), 19. (2)(c) to (h), and (11), and 125. (3)  of the 1992 Constitution. (guilty before innocent)
14. A declaration that Section 23. (2) and (3) of Act 959 is contrary to 176 of the 1992 Constitution.
15. A declaration that Section 3. (1)(d) of Act 959 is contrary to Articles 175 and 176. (1) of the 1992 Constitution.
16. A declaration that all monies and revenue and recoveries arising out of Sections 65 and 66 of Act 959 constitute public monies and revenue under Article 175 and 176 and properly ought to be paid into the Consolidated Fund.
17. (Below is the full Writ and Statement of Case. Click on the links to download)
18. KENNETH KURANCHIE VERSUS SPECIAL PROSECUTOR

STATEMENT OF CASE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR