The Deputy Attorney General, Dr. Justice Srem-Sai, has articulated a distinct rationale for the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) to lead the investigation into the AKSA/Asante Berko bribery scandal, contrasting it with the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP), asserting a more focused approach on economic crimes and money laundering within Ghana’s legal framework.
In an interview with JoyNews, Dr. Srem-Sai emphasized the distinct mandates of each institution, highlighting the potential for a broader scope of offenses to arise from the case. He stated that the decision is predicated on the legal requirements of each office, particularly the mandate to investigate potential money laundering activities, which falls squarely within EOCO’s purview.
‘It’s not simply about bribery and corruption,’ he clarified, ‘it’s also about money laundering – a crucial element in this complex scheme.’ He further emphasized that the investigation is not limited to allegations of corruption but could encompass broader economic offenses, a distinction he noted is crucial for effective prosecution.
Dr. Srem-Sai rejected suggestions that the shift to EOCO’s leadership was intended to circumvent scrutiny from the OSP. He asserted a principle of ‘agency collaboration,’ suggesting that the different mandates of the investigative bodies could be mutually beneficial. He pointed out that the various agencies possess distinct capabilities and could collaborate where necessary, a point underscored by the possibility of BNI taking over the investigation.
He explained that the objective should be to ensure the appropriate agency investigates the relevant offences, rather than creating a competitive environment among state institutions. He also emphasized the importance of establishing a clear process for decision-making within the Attorney General’s Department, stating that senior officials cannot simply disregard the advice of subordinate lawyers without documented rationale – a process he described as essential for legal compliance.
Furthermore, Dr. Srem-Sai underscored the importance of institutional independence in determining the effectiveness of investigations. He argued that the record shows that EOCO’s experience over several years gives it considerable expertise in addressing economic and organised crime.
When asked about EOCO’s efficiency compared to the OSP, he stated, ‘I think the record will show – EOCO’s work over the years.’ He continued, ‘EOCO’s longer institutional history has allowed it to develop a deeper understanding of economic crime and organized crime, giving it a distinct advantage in tackling these issues.’
Regarding calls for a broader investigation, Dr. Srem-Sai countered, ‘I understand these concerns,’ emphasizing that the focus should be on the capacity and effectiveness of investigative institutions, rather than solely focusing on whether an agency is described as independent. He explained that decisions within the Justice system are subject to established legal processes and are reviewed by senior officials, not simply by political considerations. He emphasized that officials are expected to document their disagreement with a decision, showing that a decision must be supported by legal reasoning and relevant authorities rather than political considerations.
Dr. Srem-Sai further detailed the implications of documentation within the justice system, highlighting the potential for permanent suppression of cases, stating that officials know that decisions taken today can be reviewed by their successors. He concluded by emphasizing that the focus should be on the capacity and effectiveness of investigative institutions rather than simply whether an agency is described as independent.
Watch Related Video
Source: Graphic Online
