Strategic Mobilisation Ghana Limited (SML) has petitioned the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) to investigate the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP), alleging bias, abuse of power, administrative injustice, and violations of its constitutional rights.

The petition, dated 12^th November 2025, and signed by SML’s Chief Executive Officer, Evans Adusei, seeks CHRAJ’s intervention to probe what the company describes as “a gross abuse of discretionary power” and “a violation of fair administrative process” in the OSP’s investigation and subsequent report on SML’s contracts with the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA).

The petition, filed under Article 218 of the 1992 Constitution and Section 7 of the CHRAJ Act, 1993 (Act 456), calls for a full inquiry into the conduct of the OSP’s lead investigator, Mr. Albert Akurugu, and possible complicity by the Special Prosecutor, Mr. Kissi Agyebeng.

Background to the Dispute

According to the petition, SML — which provides revenue assurance and transaction audit services to the GRA — was engaged in 2018 following what it described as “systemic failures” under a previous contractor, West Blue Consulting.

SML claims its audit work led to fiscal recoveries exceeding US$1.35 million within its first two months of operation.

The company, however, alleges that it has since been targeted by officials within the OSP, particularly Mr. Akurugu, who previously worked with the Customs Division of the GRA during the period of West Blue’s engagement.

SML contends that Mr. Akurugu’s prior association with the earlier system presents a “clear conflict of interest” and that his conduct during the investigation was “driven by personal animus and a retaliatory motive.”

The petition alleges that Mr. Akurugu openly expressed hostility toward SML’s leadership, stating during interrogation that he would “make sure SML and its CEO never work again.”

SML also claims that these remarks were captured on the OSP’s own video recordings and remain in its custody.

Additionally, SML accuses the OSP of mishandling evidence during a June 10, 2025 raid on its offices in Osu and Tema.

The company claims that officers “destroyed servers, dismantled CCTV systems, and violated digital forensic protocols”, acts it describes as “a deliberate attempt to inflict operational harm.”

According to the petition, several hardware components, including servers, firewalls, and SCADA systems, were damaged or seized in the process.

SML argues that this action breached internationally recognised standards on chain-of-custody, digital forensics, and property protection.

Alleged suppression of evidence

The petition further accuses the OSP of “deliberately suppressing evidence” from statutory institutions such as the GRA, National Petroleum Authority (NPA), Ministry of Finance (MoF), and Ghana Standards Authority, which SML claims validated its work.

It alleges that the OSP’s published report “adopted a favourable narrative of West Blue while downplaying SML’s contributions.”

SML insists that West Blue’s system had been discontinued due to operational lapses and that its own engagement filled a significant gap in Ghana’s revenue mobilisation structure.

SML also alleges that prior to the OSP’s raid, individuals connected to companies whose licences were revoked by the Customs Division in 2017 — His Majesty Freight Services Ltd. and J.B.S. Haulage & Construction — sent threatening messages to former Customs Commissioner Isaac Crentsil, referencing SML by name.

The company interprets this as part of a coordinated effort to “retaliate against the Petitioner for actions taken under previous GRA management.”

SML argues that Mr. Akurugu’s leadership of the investigation was inappropriate given his “close professional and personal association” with actors from the West Blue era.

Requests to CHRAJ

In its petition, SML requests CHRAJ to:

1. Investigate the OSP’s handling of its case and determine whether bias, abuse of power, or administrative injustice occurred.
2. Examine the role of Mr. Akurugu and any possible oversight or complicity by Special Prosecutor Kissi Agyebeng.
3. Order the OSP to produce the interrogation video recordings containing the alleged threats.
4. Recommend disciplinary or administrative sanctions against any public officers found culpable.
5. Issue any further orders deemed just and equitable.

The company argues that the actions of the OSP have “caused operational harm, reputational damage, and violated the Petitioner’s constitutional right to property and fair administrative treatment.”