Why High Court declared OSP's prosecution of cases unconstitutional(Full Ruling)

The High Court in Accra has held that the Office of the Special Prosecutor cannot prosecute offences in the name of the Republic unless it has been expressly authorised by the Attorney-General, a ruling that significantly narrows the OSP’s operational mandate in criminal prosecutions.

The decision was delivered on 15 April 2026 by Justice John Eugene Nyante Nyadu in The Republic (on the application of Peter Archibold Hyde) v Office of the Special Prosecutor, Suit No. GJ/0369/2026. The case was brought by Peter Archibold Hyde, who was himself facing prosecution by the OSP and went to court to challenge the legal basis of that prosecution.

Hyde argued that under Article 88(4) of the 1992 Constitution, all prosecutions in the name of the Republic are to be conducted by the Attorney-General or by a person authorised by the Attorney-General. He contended that the OSP had no lawful warrant, delegation or written authority from the Attorney-General to prosecute him in the name of the Republic.

In its ruling, the court first rejected the OSP’s preliminary objections that the case was out of time and that it raised a constitutional interpretation issue reserved for the Supreme Court. The judge held that Hyde filed within time because the relevant date was when he became aware of the alleged lack of prosecutorial authority, not when the charge sheet was first filed. The court also said the constitutional provision was clear enough not to require interpretation by the Supreme Court.

On the substance, the court held that section 4(2) of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959) is subject to Article 88(4) and does not by itself grant the OSP an independent constitutional power to prosecute in the name of the Republic. The judge found that the OSP may prosecute only when it has been duly authorised by the Attorney-General, and that in the absence of such authority, its exercise of prosecutorial power is unconstitutional, unlawful, null and void.

The ruling therefore restrains the OSP from initiating, conducting or continuing prosecutions in the name of the Republic without the Attorney-General’s express authorisation, a holding that could have broad downstream implications for corruption and corruption-related prosecutions already in the pipeline.