'It's striking he now questions OSP's power to free his clients' – Sammy Darko jabs ex-Deputy AG

Director of Strategy, Research and Communication at the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP), Sammy Darko, has criticised the stance taken by former Deputy Attorney General Joseph Kpemka following a recent High Court ruling on the OSP’s prosecutorial powers.

Darko’s remarks come after Kpemka defended the court’s decision, which declared ongoing prosecutions by the OSP null and void and directed that such cases be transferred to the Attorney General.

Dr Ansa-Asare weighs in on OSP's prosecutorial powers debate

Responding on Thursday, April 16, 2026, Darko noted that Kpemka had previously participated in cases prosecuted by the OSP without questioning its authority.

“Joseph Kpemka, a former Deputy Attorney General, has represented some of the accused persons in the Northern Development Authority case from the outset, through to the dismissal of their submission of no case at both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. Judgment is expected next week,” he said.

He emphasised that Kpemka did not challenge the OSP’s mandate at any stage during those proceedings.

“At no point during the trial did he question the prosecutorial authority of the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP),” Darko added.

He further cited Kpemka’s involvement in another ongoing matter.

“Mr Kpemka is also counsel in the Mustapha Hamid case, where proceedings have not been favourable to the defence,” he stated.

According to Darko, no objections were raised regarding the OSP’s authority in that case either.

“Notably, as a lawyer and a former member of the administration that enacted the OSP law, he has not raised any objection to the OSP’s prosecutorial powers in that matter,” he said.

Darko questioned the timing of Kpemka’s current position, suggesting it may be motivated by his clients’ interests.

“It is therefore striking that he now appears to question those powers, perhaps in the hope that it will help free his clients from the grip of the OSP. Principles,” he remarked.

Earlier, in an interview on Citi Eyewitness News on Wednesday, April 15, 2026, Kpemka argued that the High Court ruling was not an interpretation of the law but rather a decision based on non-compliance with statutory requirements.

“Let me state clearly that the High Court, from what I read, did not interpret the Act… that is not what the High Court embarked upon. If it had, that would have been a nullity from the beginning because the High Court is not clothed with the authority to interpret the law,” he was quoted as saying.

Kpemka explained that the ruling centred on the absence of authorisation from the Attorney-General.

“In simple terms, the law requires the OSP to operate within the confines of the statute by obtaining authorisation from the Attorney-General. Since that authorisation was not granted after the passage of Act 959, the judge held that the OSP had not complied with the law and therefore lacked the power to prosecute,” he stated.

AG has no intention to disobey High Court's order – Srem Sai speaks on ruling against OSP

He further argued that the issue stemmed from a failure to secure the necessary approval after the law was enacted.

“It was incumbent on the implementers of the law—namely the Special Prosecutor—upon the establishment of the office, to formally request authorisation from the Attorney-General. Alternatively, they could have sought a court order to compel the Attorney-General to grant that authorisation to operationalise the law,” he added.

MAG/VPO

Tsatsu Tsikata speaks on 'Unanimous FC' tag, 2020 election petition at Honorific Lecture