Special Prosecutor Kissi Agyebeng says an April 15, 2026 High Court ruling declaring parts of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act unconstitutional brought the institution's investigative and prosecutorial activities to a near standstill.

According to him, the ruling created significant uncertainty for the OSP after the High Court held that the office lacked an independent prosecutorial mandate.

Speaking at a press conference, Mr Agyebeng said the High Court subsequently invalidated prosecutions undertaken by the OSP and nullified convictions and assets secured by the office.

He said the court further directed that all OSP cases be handed over to the Attorney General.

Mr Agyebeng argued that the development was particularly problematic because a related matter concerning the constitutionality of the OSP's prosecutorial powers was already pending before the Supreme Court.

“This development brought the investigative and prosecutorial work of the OSP nationwide to a standstill and uncertainty,” he said.

According to him, other courts, with one exception, adjourned proceedings involving the OSP while awaiting the Supreme Court's decision.

“Therefore, prosecutions stalled, investigations were gravely hampered, and corrupt actors became emboldened in their opprobrious conduct,” he said.

The Special Prosecutor said the situation imposed a high cost on the country and urged consideration of the consequences of the disruption to the OSP's work.

Mr Agyebeng also disclosed that the OSP had attempted to join the Supreme Court case filed by Noah Ephraim Tetteh Adamatey against the Attorney General.

He said the application followed intelligence received by the OSP that the Attorney General might not actively defend the case challenging provisions of the OSP Act.

The OSP applied to join the case on January 27, 2026, but the Supreme Court dismissed the application.

Mr Agyebeng acknowledged that intelligence available to the OSP could not be treated as evidence in court.

“We admit that our intelligence is not evidence, and so the Supreme Court dismissed our application for joinder,” he said.

He said the Supreme Court held that the state, represented by the Attorney General, was the only proper defendant and that the OSP was not a necessary party.

The Supreme Court subsequently delivered its ruling on July 29, 2026, in the case concerning the constitutionality of the OSP's prosecutorial mandate.

Mr Agyebeng said the OSP's decision to seek joinder demonstrated that the institution had taken steps to protect its statutory mandate rather than simply wait for the outcome.

“History may be kind to us for trying to join the suit and not merely sitting back,” he said.