<<Print>>

Private Legal Practitioner, Lawyer Martin Kpebu, is hopeful that the transfer of Madam Cecelia Dapaah, the former Sanitation Minister’s case from the Office of the Special Prosecutor to the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO)  will be an opportunity that has been bequeathed to the latter to prove skeptics wrong.

The learned Lawyer revealed that despite the skepticism among some Ghanaians that EOCO may not do justice to the case as expected, the transfer done by Mr. Kissi Agyebeng offers the anti-corruption agency, an opportunity to prove the sceptics wrong.

“All government agencies, as long as they are funded by government, government has some influence. Even Martin Amidu said it. As special prosecutor, he said that President Akufo Addo is interfering too much’’.

‘’So naturally, I will also join in that concern. And the concern is positive. Once people show they are apprehensive, then that is an incentive for the state institution, in this case EOCO, to prove us wrong. So, this should be an incentive for EOCO to prove us wrong. The lack of trust is positive, because the moment we all end up praise singing of a state institution, there is the incentive to be complacent. So, I see it as positive that people are vigilant and weary because of the context, and clearing agent issues.”

The Lawyer made this commentary while granting an interview on TV3’s Ghana Tonight with Alfred Ocansey.

Lawyer Martin Kpebu’s comment comes on the heels of the SP's formal announcement of his outfit handing over the case to EOCO because, “the Office has determined that the crime borders largely on money laundering, which falls within the mandate of EOCO.”

Mr. Kpebu argued that it is not every money laundering case that EOCO takes up.

"Recently, the Supreme Court has been very clear about this jurisdiction of money laundering. The Supreme Court said even the EOCO that the OSP has sent this case to, EOCO doesn't have 100% mandate in all money laundering cases. EOCO's mandate, in the recent Supreme Court ruling- Ex parte Ibrahim Malik, is that EOCO's mandate to do money laundering cases is limited to cases in which the money is government money’’.

‘’If you hear money laundering, it means there is a predicate offence. And a predicate offence is which offence was committed to get that money which is now going to be laundered. And when we say laundered, meaning washing- you've stolen money, you've gotten money from cocaine, you've gotten money from defrauding by false pretenses, name the crime. So, you've got money from a certain crime and now you want the money to look legitimate. So, the person brings the money to do real estate business and other businesses government money. So far, Mr Agyebeng has not told us the predicate offence,” he explained’’, he disclosed.

The Human Rights and Anti-Corruption lawyer, therefore suggested that “based on the Supreme court decision, it is safer that EOCO involves the police so that if it turns out that the matter is not for EOCO, because the police are involved, they take over quickly. Rather than EOCO does it alone and sees that the money is private, it's not government money and it has to send it to the police.”

“In future, it means that OSP has to bring in the other agencies. So that at every stage they know what is going on. So that if they take over the case, they don't have to re-event the wheel," he suggested.