The Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO) has taken up the case of former Sanitation Minister Cecilia Dapaah after the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) refuted claims that it had cleared her.
The OSP launched a thorough investigation after receiving complaints about corruption and corruption-related offences involving their domestic workers, who were accused of stealing large quantities of foreign and local currency as well as Ms. Dapaah’s and her husband’s personal belongings.
After several months of probing, the OSP concluded its inquiry, citing the predominant involvement of money laundering and subsequently transferred the case to EOCO.
However, the Attorney General’s office advised EOCO against further investigation, citing insufficient documentation to support a money laundering prosecution and ongoing police inquiries into the funding sources of Dapaah.
In its advice, the AG acknowledged that while EOCO retains the authority to initiate its own investigation, it was “not necessary,” citing the lack of substantive grounds.
“In the absence of the identification of any criminality associated with the properties retrieved from the suspects, the OSP’s referral to EOCO for investigations to be conducted into money laundering is without basis,” the Attorney General’s office advised.
Subsequently, the Attorney General explained that Ms Dapaah was exonerated by the OSP and not his office.
In response, the OSP stated that the investigation mainly turned up cases of money laundering and that it did not clear Ms. Dapaah of charges related to corruption.
They emphasised the lack of request from EOCO for the FBI investigation report and underscored the confidentiality clauses therein.
The OSP’s Director for Strategy, Research, and Communications, Mr. Samuel Appiah Darko, elaborated on their decision to refer the case to EOCO rather than pursue a money laundering probe independently.
“We want to make it very clear that EOCO did not request for the FBI report. Even if they did, the FBI report has a lot of confidentiality clauses that were directed, particularly to the OSP, and you can’t just give it to another agency because you have transferred the case. There ought to be a lot of inter-agency collaboration and clearance. So if it had happened, we may have triggered the clearance clauses so that either we are cleared by FBI or FBI sends the report directly to EOCO,” Mr Darko explained to Joy News.
He said: “The OSP should be considered as a whistleblower to EOCO. So as a whistle-blower, we gave EOCO platinum information. Ordinarily, you will not even find other agencies giving such information to EOCO.”
Mr. Darko claims: “Our referral relates to more than just a transaction that took place in America. Furthermore, the investigation we were carrying out was into corruption, not money laundering. Since there was no way we could have gone further, conducted further investigation, produced a report on money laundering, and sent it to EOCO for transfer to the Attorney General, we believe we did everything necessary to send that referral to EOCO. We only referred a matter to EOCO as whistle-blowers for EOCO to investigate. We cannot instruct EOCO on what they should do,” he added.
SEND A STORY: Do you have a story for us or need a promotion / advertisement? Submit them via our email, kumasionlinetv@gmail.com or via on +233 550623377
