Manasseh, the investigative journalist, has been an interesting figure for some time. His new claim—that the OSP has taken credit for his work and that he must therefore “fight” the OSP—is quite surprising.

To date, he has abandoned almost all his allegations except two:

-That the OSP began the SML investigation on 29 January; and

-That because he was invited in February, the investigation must have started in February.

To support this, he displays what he describes as a “Diary of Action” from one team, arguing that since he was contacted in February, that must mark the beginning of the investigation. The assumption that he is somehow the centre of, or alter ego of, the SML investigation is unusual. The investigation did not revolve around him. Once he submitted a petition based on his journalistic work, the matter became that of the Republic. Those with the mandate to conduct criminal investigations took over. He was invited as a person of interest when necessary—not as the focus of the entire inquiry.

Second, Mr. Ken Ofori-Atta was directed to appear before the OSP on 24 January 2025. This alone indicates that substantial investigative work had already been done before any invitations were issued. Establishing probable cause requires groundwork. As if that were not enough, he further argues that because the OSP identified Mr. Ernest Akore later, the investigation must have begun only in February. He should rather appreciate that through thorough investigative work, the OSP uncovered Mr. Akore’s role, identified him as a suspect, and he is now an accused person. Both Mr. Ofori-Atta and Mr. Akore are subjects of an extradition request.

Third, what makes his claim even more puzzling is that as early as January 2024, a news portal he once edited—and under his own hand—reported that the OSP had begun the SML investigation. The same individual now insists the OSP did not start early, preferring instead to rely on a single team’s diary of action, while he has no knowledge of how many teams worked on SML, how many experts were consulted, or the volume of engagements undertaken before concluding that the suspects had a case to answer. If he wishes to give accused persons an advantage, that is his choice—but a whole prosecutorial body will not humour him. The OSP will present its evidence before the court, not before media houses that continue to amplify his claims.

He also appears to suggest that the OSP should arrest before investigating. The Office has long moved away from that outdated approach and does not conduct “pen-and-paper” or arrest-first investigations.

What, then, is the complaint? First, he said the work was delayed—but the investigation has been completed. He said prosecution was delayed—but prosecution is now underway. Now that the Republic is focused on the trial, he joins a coordinated effort to create the impression that the investigation started late, at a time when we are prosecuting eight high-profile individuals who possess significant resources to challenge the Republic. Ken and his colleagues must be delighted with the narrative he is pushing.

Whether the investigation began early or late, the facts remain simple: it has been completed; people are standing trial; contracts have been cancelled; and significant public funds have been saved—US$173 million in oil revenue, US$2.6 billion in gold revenue. Furthermore, based on the actions of the eight individuals involved, the Republic was at risk of losing US$2.7 billion over five years. One wonders whether his discomfort stems from the exposure of the magnitude of the potential losses.

Finally, the recognition he seeks was already given when the OSP published the investigative report. Allow the Republic to prosecute its case with its witnesses. If you cannot assist the process, refrain from distorting it—unless the intention is to undermine the trial rather than support accountability.

And by the way, he now wants credit given to former President Nana Akufo-Addo for cancelling the contract. That is simply inaccurate. In December 2024, Nana Akufo-Addo, through his lawyers, authorised the GRA to allow SML to continue upstream operations. It is the cancellation by President Mahama that terminated the contract. That is why SML is currently appealing to the new administration to reconsider.

I hope these clarifications help.

By:

Sammy Darko

Director of the Strategy, Research, and Communication Division at the Office of the Special Prosecutor

DISCLAIMER: Independentghana.com will not be liable for any inaccuracies contained in this article. The views expressed in the article are solely those of the author's, and do not reflect those of The Independent Ghana