Former Tamale Central MP Inusah Fuseini has raised questions about the legal basis for compelling a person to appear before the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) when they refuse an invitation for questioning.

Speaking on JoyNews’ Newsfile on Saturday, Mr Fuseini said the confrontation involving Manhyia South MP Nana Agyei Baffour Awuah and EOCO personnel raised “disturbing” legal issues that warranted closer examination.

“There are disturbing aspects of the case, and there are issues in my studies in jurisprudence [that] will allow me to ask and ask them as questions,” he said.

Mr Fuseini referred to Section 19 of the Economic and Organised Crime Office Act, 2010 (Act 804), which empowers the EOCO Executive Director to invite or require a person to appear before the office for investigative purposes.

He, however, questioned what happens when a person refuses to honour such an invitation and whether another constitutional provision can be relied upon to address what he described as a gap in the law.

“For instance, Section 19 of Act 804 gives the EOCO Executive Director the authority to invite or require somebody to appear before him for the purposes of investigations,” he said.

“The lacuna there is that when the person refuses to avail himself for the investigation purposes…can we argue that that lacuna can be cured by Section 41 of the Constitution?”

Despite raising the legal question, Mr Fuseini said he agreed with EOCO on the plain reading of Parliament’s Standing Orders, its established practices and conventions, and the relevant law.

“I agree with EOCO on the plain reading of the Standing Orders and practice and conventions of Parliament and the law,” he said.

He also argued that the letter issued by EOCO requesting the MP’s attendance should not be treated as a court process.

“I agree with EOCO because that letter is not a court process, or it is not a process originated from the court,” he said.

Mr Fuseini further gave his interpretation of the initial encounter between the EOCO personnel and Mr Baffour Awuah, saying the video appeared to show the officer attempting to explain to the MP why he was required at the agency.

“When you watch the video carefully, it appears to me that the first point of contact, the security personnel from EOCO, was trying to explain to the Member of Parliament why he was wanted at EOCO,” he said.

The comments follow the confrontation at the Accra High Court on Wednesday, September 23, involving the Manhyia South MP and personnel from EOCO.

The incident has generated debate over EOCO’s investigative powers, the procedures governing its invitations, and the relationship between such powers and parliamentary rules and privileges.