Independence of SFO Questioned

Questions are being raised of the operations of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) in relation to request for financial assistance from the Office to organisations whose operations it investigates.

The doubts seem to have been raised by revelations that the SFO demanded from and received 30 million cedis from SSNIT in pursuit of investigations into SSNIT transactions such as the Obotan debacle. They reason that the practice could compromise the position of the Office in its desire to be free, fair and without prejudice to any party involved in a perceived wrong doing.

The Act of parliament that established the Office in 1993, Act 466, states among others that the Office must be “a specialized agency of government to monitor, investigate and, on authority of the Attorney-General, prosecute any offence involving serious financial or economic loss to the state and to make provision for connected and incidental purposes.”

The act also states that emolument and expenditure of the Office shall be met out of such funds as Parliament shall approve and demands that the emolument and expenditure of the Office shall be met out such funds, as Parliament shall approve. It also enjoins the Executive Director of the Office to submit to the Minister for Finance each year through the Minister of Justice, its detailed estimates for the ensuing year.

Officials at the Office have therefore questioned the propriety of SFO appealing to an organisation it investigates with the submission that it would prevent them from acting in a neutral position.

Published below are one such request from the SFO and a cheque for 30 million cedis released by SSNIT for the purposes sought. The Office was set up to investigate any suspected offence provided for by law, which appears to the Director on reasonable ground to involve serious financial or economic loss to the state or to any state organization or other institution in which the state has financial interest.