A front view of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has dismissed an application seeking to join the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) as a party to a constitutional suit challenging aspects of its powers under the law.
The suit was filed by private legal practitioner Noah Adamptey, who is questioning the constitutionality of Parliament’s decision to establish the OSP under the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959).
Private citizen ‘drags’ Attorney General to Supreme Court over OSP legality – Deputy AG
According to a report by 3news.com on Tuesday, January 27, 2026, lawyers for the OSP, led by Dr Isidore Tufuor, argued that the reliefs being sought in the case directly affect the Office’s statutory mandate.
Moving the application for joinder, counsel for the OSP submitted that the suit raises constitutional questions, particularly in relation to Sections 4 and 33 of Act 959.
He clarified that while the action does not challenge the existence of the OSP itself, it questions certain powers granted to the Office by law.
Dr Tufuor contended that the OSP ought to be joined to the suit, arguing that its participation was necessary for the court to fully and effectively determine the issues before it.
However, the Deputy Attorney-General, Dr Justice Srem-Sai, opposed the application, maintaining that the OSP has no direct interest in the matter.
“It is the creator who is to answer for the creation,” he argued, explaining that since the OSP was established by an Act of Parliament, any constitutional challenge to its legal framework must be defended by the state through the Attorney-General.
The report added that Dr Srem-Sai further emphasised that the OSP does not stand to gain or lose personally from the outcome of the case and therefore cannot be considered a necessary party to the action.
3news.com also reported that Adamptey agreed with this position, stating that the OSP’s role had been “gravely misconstrued” and that it should not be drawn into a constitutional dispute arising from legislative action.
After considering the submissions of all parties, a panel of the Supreme Court, presided over by Justice Baffoe-Bonnie, ruled that the OSP is not a necessary party to the suit.
OSP releases court dates for high-profile cases in 2026
“We have reviewed the application and the processes filed. Having heard all counsel on their submissions, we are of the view that the Office of the Special Prosecutor is not a necessary party to this suit,” the court was quoted as saying.
The application for joinder was therefore dismissed, allowing the constitutional case to proceed without the OSP as a party.
MAG/MA
‘Veep has chosen Haruna Iddrisu as her running mate’ – Afenyo-Markin alleges:
