The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP), has officially handed over its investigation into the financial affairs and assets of former Minister for Sanitation and Water Resources, Cecilia Abena Dapaah to the Economic and Organised Crime Office (EOCO).
In a statement released on Thursday, January 25, the OSP noted the absence of direct evidence of corruption in the seized funds and frozen bank accounts linked to Ms. Dapaah and her associates.
The OSP clarified that prosecuting matters related to the investigation is beyond its mandate, as that falls solely within the jurisdiction of EOCO.
This follows an extensive seven-month investigation by the OSP, alongside a parallel inquiry conducted by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
“The investigation has identified strong indications of suspected money laundering and structuring. While the OSP acknowledges these suspected offences, they do not fall directly within the mandate of the Office. By law, the office cannot investigate, prosecute nor recover proceeds of crime except those that fall within corruption and corruption-related offences as defined under section 79 of the Office of the Special Prosecutor Act, 2017 (Act 959).”
“In compliance with section 3 of Act 959, which mandates the OSP to cooperate and coordinate with other law enforcement agencies, the case has been transferred to EOCO for further investigation,” it said in the statement.
It has thus withdrawn the application to formalise the seizure and freezing of Cecilia Dapaah’s funds and bank accounts. Additionally, the office has abandoned the criminal trial initiated against the former sanitation minister for non-declaration of assets.
This move follows a series of in-chamber hearings on the matter.
For several months, the Special Prosecutor has held funds seized during the investigation of Cecilia Dapaah in its custody.
The office froze certain bank accounts of Cecilia Dapaah over alleged involvement in corruption and corruption-related activities. Cecilia Dapaah has persisted in her denial of the accusations.
Initially, an appeal at the Court of Appeal and a certiorari application on a decision to expedite the hearing time hindered the process.
Subsequently, the original judge took leave, necessitating the appointment of a new judge for the case.
Source: myjoyonline.com
