Former Supreme Court Justice William Atuguba has cautioned that the Supreme Court’s final decision on the powers of the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) could reshape the broader framework of prosecutorial authority in Ghana, far beyond the immediate dispute involving the anti-corruption body.

Speaking in an interview with Joy News’ Gemma Appiah, Justice Atuguba said the case raises fundamental constitutional questions about how prosecutorial powers are exercised, delegated, and limited under the 1992 Constitution.

According to him, the outcome will not only determine the operational scope of the OSP but could also redefine the relationship between the Attorney-General and other institutions that currently exercise delegated prosecutorial functions.

“It’s not such a smooth-sailing legal matter,” he said.

Justice Atuguba explained that the case touches on multiple layers of constitutional interpretation, including the extent of the Attorney-General’s authority under Article 88, and whether that authority can be delegated to independent bodies such as the OSP.

He noted that long-standing delegation practices within Ghana’s justice system have never been fully tested under the current constitutional framework, making the Supreme Court’s task particularly significant.

The retired judge suggested that assumptions about the legality of such delegation arrangements have largely gone unchallenged until now.

While the OSP was established to handle politically sensitive corruption cases independently, the High Court recently ruled that it cannot proceed with prosecutions without AG approval — a decision that is now on appeal at the Supreme Court.

If the High Court ruling is upheld, it would significantly limit the OSP’s operational independence and place it under closer control of the Attorney-General’s office.

Justice Atuguba warned that whatever direction the Supreme Court takes, its ruling will likely set a binding precedent that affects not just the OSP but the wider architecture of prosecution in Ghana.

He pointed to the constitutional tension between Article 88, which vests prosecutorial power in the Attorney-General, and the legislative intent behind the OSP Act, which sought to insulate certain corruption prosecutions from political influence.

Reconciling those two positions, he suggested, is now a central question before the apex court.

The OSP has filed for a stay of execution of the High Court ruling, a decision that will determine whether the office can continue its operations while the substantive appeal is pending.

The Supreme Court is expected to provide clarity on the matter in the coming months.