Give us clear reasons why Ofori-Atta must appear in person – Martin Kpebu tells OSP – Nsemkeka
Private legal practitioner, Martin Kpebu, has called on the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) to clearly explain why it insists on the physical presence of former Finance Minister Ken Ofori-Atta for ongoing legal proceedings.
Speaking on Joy FM’s News Night on Monday, June 2, Mr Kpebu noted that while the OSP has initiated extradition proceedings and an Interpol Red Notice against Mr Ofori-Atta, it has not adequately explained why it refuses to consider a video conference, especially given the provisions of the Mutual Legal Assistance Act, 2010 (Act 807).
- Read also: Ofori-Atta declared wanted again by OSP after missing June 2 deadline
“If you just say you insist he should come, articulate the reasons,” Mr Kpebu stated.
“Once we have a law that says that we can request that a video conference be done—where you want to shun that law aside, or you are not going to use that law—there should be reasons, very articulate reasons.”
- Read also: We investigated an ex-President; what’s special about Ofori-Atta? – Special Prosecutor ask
The former Finance Minister’s legal team has cited health concerns, including a cancer diagnosis and upcoming surgery, as reasons for his inability to return to Ghana.
Mr Ofori-Atta’s lawyers have proposed a virtual interview as an alternative. However, the Special Prosecutor, Kissi Agyebeng, has rejected this request, insisting on his physical presence and re-declaring him a wanted person after he failed to appear by the June 2 deadline.
- Read also: Ofori-Atta diagnosed with cancer – Special Prosecutor informed
The OSP maintained that suspects in criminal investigations must appear in person and that legal representation or virtual interviews cannot substitute for physical attendance.
The office has also initiated processes for an Interpol Red Notice to facilitate Mr Ofori-Atta’s arrest and extradition.
Mr Kpebu stated that if the Special Prosecutor intends to sidestep established legal avenues such as video testimony or mutual legal assistance, the public deserves a clear and legal justification for that decision.