Invitation to assist in investigations doesn’t imply guilt

1. Act 959 which establishes the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) and defines its powers, does not grant the Special Prosecutor (SP) the authority to declare or label anyone as a fugitive. The OSP is primarily an investigative and prosecutorial body, not a court, and therefore lacks the jurisdiction to make such pronouncements .

2. An invitation to assist in investigations does not imply guilt and can be accepted or declined. If a person refuses to co-operate, the OSP may issue a summons to compel their appearance. Noncompliance with a summons may lead to a court-issued arrest warrant. If a Court grants the warrant and the individual actively evades arrest, that is where there may then be deemed fugitive under the law.

3. Declaring someone a fugitive is a legal determination usually made by the Court or law enforcement bodies within specific frameworks, including arrest warrants and extradition processes. It is therefore not within the SP’s mandate to make such declarations!

4. In the instant case, the OSP itself has confirmed that the investigation is ongoing, with no charges pressed, no prosecution initiated, and no court ruling against the suspect. What then is the grounds for labeling the individual as a fugitive?

5. The OSP’s continuous use of such description regarding someone who is merely under investigation and has not been formally charged is a profound departure from its legal mandate. This approach is not only wrong in law but also questions the readiness of the SP to give the individual a fair hearing.

6. While public officials must be held accountable for their actions & inactions, it is equally important to ensure they are not subjected to prejudicial persecutions in the court of public opinion against the presumption of innocence guaranteed under our constitution.

Read also…