Ofori-Atta's Legal Predicament Deepens: Experts Clash Over Blame and Jurisdiction

The legal complexities surrounding Ghana’s efforts to secure the return of former Finance Minister, Ken Ofori-Atta, have sparked significant debate among legal experts, particularly following a United States court’s decision that questioned aspects of the evidence presented by Ghana’s Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP). While the OSP maintains that Mr. Ofori-Atta remains a fugitive from justice, differing views have emerged on the appropriate course of action and the jurisdiction of the U.S. court.

Samuel Atta Akyea, lead counsel for Bernard Antwi-Boasiako, urged restraint in the ongoing legal efforts, advocating for Mr. Ofori-Atta to be given the opportunity to return voluntarily. Speaking on JoyNews’ Newsfile on Saturday, July 25, Mr. Atta Akyea expressed reservations about using extradition procedures, stating that it “would not sit well with our sense of life” to have him “hauled” back. He emphasized that Mr. Ofori-Atta understands the “nuances of extradition” and its implications, suggesting that allowing him the space to elect to come voluntarily would be a preferable and more respectful approach, the outcome of which would become clear in due course.

Conversely, former Tamale Central MP and lawyer, Inusah Fuseini, strongly argued that the U.S. immigration judge had no legal authority to make conclusive pronouncements on the criminal case involving Mr. Ofori-Atta in Ghana. His comments followed a U.S. immigration judge’s finding that documents from the OSP did not provide sufficient evidence linking Mr. Ofori-Atta to criminal wrongdoing, a finding that facilitated the approval of his green card application. Mr. Fuseini maintained that the judge’s mandate was strictly limited to determining Mr. Ofori-Atta’s qualification to adjust his immigration status after his permission to remain in the U.S. had expired. He stressed that criminal jurisdiction is territorial, and the U.S. court had no authority over criminal proceedings in Ghana, which do not fall under international agreements like the ICC framework to which the U.S. does not subscribe.

Adding another layer to the discussion, Professor of International Law at the University of Ghana, Kwadwo Appiagyei Atua, asserted that the OSP should not bear sole responsibility for the challenges in securing Mr. Ofori-Atta’s return. Prof. Atua, also speaking on JoyNews’ Newsfile, indicated that other state institutions, including the Attorney-General’s Office and Ghana’s security agencies, should also be considered responsible. He challenged the characterization of Mr. Ofori-Atta’s departure as “fleeing,” explaining that he initially received permission to travel for medical attention. Although he overstayed, evidence suggested a need for further healthcare, including surgery. Prof. Atua concurred with others that the U.S. immigration judge likely exceeded the scope of their authority by delving into the merits of Ghana’s criminal case, as the immigration proceedings were primarily concerned with Mr. Ofori-Atta’s continued stay in the U.S. on humanitarian grounds, given he had overstayed his initial permission in the U.S. as well.