The Global Security for Africa Research and Good Governance (GLOSARGG) has raised red flags over what it describes as a troubling escalation in public discourse targeting Ghana’s anti-corruption architecture, particularly the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP).

It warns that such narratives risk undermining the country’s governance and security framework.

In a press statement issued on 20th April 2026 and signed by its Executive Secretary, Francis Ahovi, the governance and security think tank cautioned that the current wave of criticism directed at the OSP may have far-reaching consequences beyond institutional reputation.

According to GLOSARGG, while scrutiny of public institutions is a natural feature of democratic governance, the tone and trajectory of recent commentary appear to be shifting into dangerous territory.

“The Office of the Special Prosecutor is facing questions from people across the spectrum. Some people are even trying to discredit the work of the Special Prosecutor. It is good to question things in a democracy. The way people are criticising the Office of the Special Prosecutor now is a concern,” the statement noted.

It further warned that the nature of the debate raises deeper concerns about national intent and institutional integrity. “It makes us wonder if people really want to hold institutions accountable,” GLOSARGG added.

At the heart of the organisation’s concern is what it describes as a distortion in the interpretation of law and public accountability mechanisms. It cautioned that legal arguments are increasingly being shaped in ways that may weaken, rather than strengthen, the rule of law.

“The thing that is really worrying is that people are using the law in a way that’s not fair. They are interpreting the law in a way that helps them avoid getting in trouble than doing what is right,” the statement said, warning that such trends represent “a direct attack on the rule of law, which is essential for a democracy to work.”

GLOSARGG also drew attention to the personalisation of institutional debates, cautioning that such developments are eroding the quality of national discourse and feeding into a culture of institutional distrust.

While acknowledging the importance of passion in public debate, the organisation warned against its degeneration into hostility. “While it is good to be passionate about things, making legal and institutional debates personal can make it hard for people to think clearly and make decisions,” it observed, linking the trend to what it described as a broader “pull him down syndrome” that undermines collective progress.

The statement also referenced what it termed the “mother serpent of corruption,” a metaphor used to describe entrenched corruption systems, arguing that weakening oversight institutions could inadvertently strengthen the very systems Ghana seeks to dismantle.

“If we weaken the Office of the Special Prosecutor… it will not just affect that one office. It will hurt the system of good governance, transparency and accountability,” GLOSARGG warned.

From a security standpoint, the organisation outlined a series of potential national risks should anti-corruption institutions be weakened. It cautioned that such a trajectory could have implications for both stability and public trust.

Among the risks highlighted were increased illicit financial flows, declining confidence in state institutions, and the potential rise of organised criminal networks.

GLOSARGG warned that “it will make it easier for crime and illegal money flows to happen which will hurt national security and the economy,” while also noting that citizens may “lose trust in the government and become violent because they will think the government cannot provide justice and accountability.”

It further stressed that sustained institutional weakening could trigger public unrest, stating that citizens “might even get angry and protest” if accountability structures are perceived to be ineffective.

GLOSARGG called for a national recommitment to institutional strengthening rather than institutional weakening, particularly in the fight against corruption.

“If Ghana wants to fight corruption it needs to stop weakening its institutions and start making them stronger,” the statement emphasised. It further called for enhanced independence and prosecutorial power for the OSP, insisting that “the Office of the Special Prosecutor is important and weakening it will have consequences.”

Find the full statement below;

Background to Quo Warranto OSP

An Accra High Court has ruled that the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) does not have independent authority to prosecute criminal cases, directing that all matters initiated by the anti-corruption body be referred to the Attorney-General’s Department.

The decision, delivered on Wednesday, April 15, has created uncertainty over ongoing prosecutions handled by the OSP, placing them effectively in abeyance pending further legal direction.

Presiding judge, Justice John Eugene Nyadu Nyante, held that although the OSP is empowered to investigate corruption-related offences, it lacks the constitutional mandate to independently initiate prosecutions.

The court based its ruling on Article 88 of the 1992 Constitution, which vests prosecutorial authority in the Attorney-General.

The ruling followed an application for quo warranto filed by Peter Achibold Hyde, who challenged the legal authority of the OSP to undertake prosecutions.

What is OSP saying?

The OSP strongly criticised the decision, arguing that the High Court had exceeded its jurisdiction.

In a statement issued shortly after the ruling, the anti-graft body said it had begun steps to challenge the decision at the appropriate forum.

“The OSP states that it is taking steps to quickly overturn the decision of the General Jurisdiction Court since the High Court does not have jurisdiction to, in effect, strike down parts of an Act of Parliament as unconstitutional. It is only the Supreme Court which can strike down parts of an Act of Parliament as unconstitutional,” the OSP stated.